SECOND READING. (Hansard, 7 July 1884)

§ MR. ONSLOW
objected to the second reading. He did not know who had charge of the Bill, and he did not hear anyone move the second reading. Perhaps some Member of the Government would say who made the Motion.

§ MR. SPEAKER
The noble Lord (Lord Elcho) raised his hat.

§ MR. ONSLOW
said, he must certainly object to the Bill under the circumstances. They had received no explanation whatever why the Bill was brought in, and the 3rd clause was very objectionable, inasmuch as it empowered any policeman, and any other person, to enter any premises to ascertain whether any cruelty was being practised. If the noble Lord (Lord Elcho) knew anything about the Bill which he had raised his hat to move the second reading of, perhaps he would vouchsafe a little information to the House. He (Mr. Onslow) understood it was brought in in "another place" by the Earl of Redesdale in order to correct what was considered improper pigeon-shooting. It appeared to him that the Bill was one which would excite great opposition, inasmuch as it was calculated to spoil legitimate sport. He trusted the House would not agree to the second reading.

§ LORD ELCHO
said, it would be in the memory of hon. Members that last year the hon. Member for Glasgow (Mr. Anderson) introduced a Bill which was to put a stop to pigeon-shooting. He (Lord Elcho) was one of the supporters of that Bill, because he was led, by the hon. Gentleman's arguments, and by what he had heard elsewhere, to believe that the greatest cruelties were perpetrated at pigeon-shooting matches. He supported this Bill, which had been passed by the House of Lords without any opposition, because it seemed to him it would do a great deal to render impossible those cruelties which the hon. Member for Glasgow (Mr. Anderson), and other hon. Members, alleged took place at pigeon-shooting matches. The 371 hon. Member for Guildford (Mr. Onslow) objected to the Bill, because any persons might be empowered to examine birds provided for shooting matches. The hon. Gentleman evidently forgot that it was only upon the order of a Justice of the Peace that persons might enter premises to make the examination in question. He (Lord Elcho) did not think it likely that a Justice of the Peace would give an order to unduly qualified persons, one of whom must be a police constable. The objection of the hon. Gentleman ought to be raised in Committee; it certainly did not attack the principle of the Bill. It was simply hoped that the operation of the Bill would tend to do away with cruelties which it was alleged, and he believed truly alleged, existed.

§ MR. WARTON
said, he did not wish to discuss the merits of the Bill, but to object to the second reading being taken now owing to the peculiar circumstances under which it was moved. This was the first time the measure had made any substantial appearance in the House of Commons, and no Notice had been given that the second reading would be moved that night. He had long tried to call the attention of the House to the peculiarity of the present mode of procedure. The Bill was brought in in the other House; but it struck him as being a very wrong proceeding that the second reading should be moved in this House without proper Notice being given. On the 1st of April he had a Motion down affecting the mode of procedure in matters of this kind; but he could not move it owing to the desire of the House to facilitate the passing of the Representation of the People Bill. He had a similar Motion down for to-morrow; but, again, he was to be deprived of the opportunity of moving it. ["Divide!"] His Liberal Friends opposite ought to remember that some day or other there might be Bills brought in to which they greatly objected, and which they would be anxious to have seriously considered. He believed that strictly and technically an hon. Member was in Order in bringing in a Bill one evening, and putting it down for second reading the next evening; but he, nevertheless, thought it was very objectionable that Bills should be hurried through the House. There had been no opportunity at all of considering this particular measure, and in order that such an opportunity should 372 be afforded be begged to move the adjournment of the debate.