[BILL 85.] COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 12 March 1885)

§ MR. SEXTON,
in moving to insert, after Clause 3, the following new Clause:— During the twenty-four hours, from midnight to midnight, within which the poll at an election subject to this Act is taken for any place defined in section two, such plaoe shall be exempt from the operation of section eleven of 'The Prevention of Crime (Ireland) Act, 1882,' said, the police had very considerable powers in Ireland after dark, and hon. Members knew full well to what lengths constables would sometimes go in derogation of their rights. The object of this clause was to secure to the voter free access to the poll.

§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKE
said, he was not in a position to accept this clause, and he could not accept it that night for reasons which he would very briefly give to the Committee. This Bill, should it become an Act, would come into force at the end of the present Parliament. Now, the Crimes Act was a temporary Act, and the question of its renewal, as a whole or in part, would shortly have to be considered by himself and his Colleagues. Up to the present, no decision had been come to on the point which would justify him in debating upon the merits of a clause relating to a particular portion of the Crimes Act. It was impossible, therefore, for him to accept the clause.

§ MR. HEALY
said, that if the right hon. Baronet's (Sir Charles W. Dilke's) argument was a good one, it would have been a proper one to set up in the 1042 case of the Parliamentary Elections (Corrupt and Illegal Practices) Act. In that Act he (Mr. Healy) got a clause inserted, to the effect that the Crimes Act should not apply to any offence which was in the former Act. The argument of the right hon. Gentleman, therefore, fell to the ground. He and his hon. Friends were glad to hear that the Cabinet had not yet decided to renew the Crimes Act; but, after all, the right hon. Gentleman's statement did not correspond with a statement recently made by the Government Whip (Lord Richard Grosvenor). The noble Lord, who did not fling away his words, either in or out of the House, told his constituents the other day that it was the intention of the Government to renew the Crimes Act, and the hon. Gentleman the Member for Leeds (Mr. Herbert Gladstone) was reported in the Irish papers to have made a similar statement. [Mr. HERBERT GLADSTONE: I did not say that.] At that time of the morning (3.30), he could not ask the hon. Gentleman what he did say. Anyhow, if the Government did resolve to renew the Crimes Act, the least thing they could do was to provide that its Curfew Clauses should not extend to polling. If the Government did not intend to renew the Crimes Act, the blot now existing in the Parliamentary Elections (Corrupt and Illegal Practices) Act should be removed.

§ MR. SEXTON
said, he took it, from what had been stated, that the Government had as yet formed no intention as to the renewal of the Crimes Act. That was an interesting statement, and enabled him to indulge a hope that they might, at a later period, be able to inform the House that they did not intend to ask for its renewal. If, on the contrary, they should propose to renew it, there would still be an Irish Party who would use every endeavour to oppose it. He would now ask leave to withdraw the clause.

§ MR. WARTON
rose to move the insertion of the following Clause:— Part II. of the First Schedule of "The Parliamentary Elections (Corrupt and Illegal Practices) Act, 1883,' shall be read and construed as if the words following were not contained therein, viz., 'not exceeding the amount authorised by the Act of the thirty-eighth and thirty-ninth years of Victoria, chapter eighty-four.'

THE CHAIRMAN
said, the clause the hon. and learned Member proposed to move was one which it was clearly not in the power of the Committee to insert; and he should, therefore, rule that the clause was out of Order.

§ MR. WARTON
rose to Order. He wished to point out that the Bill made an alteration in the hours of polling; and by extending them would, therefore, extend the labour of the Returning Officers. Owing to a singular blunder in the Parliamentary Elections (Corrupt and Illegal Practices) Act, which he had noticed at the time, there was an inconsistency which was very curious; and the result was that a Returning Officer might charge more than he had a right to charge, and a Member might lose his seat. He, therefore, submitted that some consideration should be given to the point.

§ MR. A. R. D. ELLIOT
rose to Order. The hon. and learned Member for Bridport (Mr. Warton) was persisting in moving a clause which the Chairman had declared to be out of Order.

THE CHAIRMAN
said, the hon. and learned Member for Bridport was speaking to a point of Order.

§ MR. WARTON
said, he was pointing out that if the poll were kept open hours longer than hitherto the labour of the Returning Officers would be increased, and the payments would necessarily be larger.

THE CHAIRMAN
said, he felt bound to rule that the clause was out of Order, and that it was not in the power of the Committee to insert it; but it was perfectly competent to the hon. and learned Member for Bridport to move it on Report.

§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKE
said, it might save time, and prevent the hon. and learned Member (Mr. Warton) putting the clause down for the Report, if he (Sir Charles W. Dilke) were now to state that the point raised was one on which his hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General would propose some legislation, as he fancied it would be necessary to adopt some such provision as the hon. and learned Member proposed.

§ MR. WARTON
said, he would suggest that the Report stage should be considered that day week, as some Notice would be required for the clause promised on behalf of Her Majesty's Government.

§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKE
said, if the hon. and learned Member would give to the Clerk at the Table the Amendment which the Chairman had ruled out of Order in the Committee stage there need be no further Notice.

§ MR. R. N. FOWLER
asked, whether it was understood that the hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General would bring in a clause?

§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKE
said, if the hon. and learned Member for Bridport would place the clause in the hands of the Clerk at the Table without delay, he (Sir Charles W. Dilke) would inform his hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General what was proposed to be done. He perfectly understood the object of the hon. and learned Member for Bridport, and his impression was that to meet that object it would be necessary to insert the clause in another Bill; but if it were handed in at once he would consult the Attorney General, and inform the hon. Gentleman as to the course that would be proposed.