§ Order for Committee read.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."
§ MR. LEWIS (Londonderry)I think we are entitled to know what is the view of Her Majesty's Government with reference to this Bill. I need hardly say that it is a measure of serious importance, and it is difficult to believe that it is intended to be taken now, and at this period of the Session. Surely the Government will not allow the Bill to be dealt with under the circumstances.
§ THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. HENRY H. FOWLER) (Wolverhampton, E.)I appeal to the hon. Member in charge of the Bill to consider whether it is advisable to proceed with it. Whatever may happen to the Bill in this House, it will have to go to 156 the House of Lords, where it would probably give rise to considerable discussion; and, looking at all the circumstances, I think it would be impossible that it should pass into law this Session. I suggest that the Bill should be withdrawn.
§ MR. SEXTON (Sligo, S.)The Lords have enjoyed the luxury of throwing out this Bill every year, and I suggest that we should give them another opportunity of dealing with it.
§ Question put.
§ The House divided:—Ayes 66; Noes 17: Majority 49.—(Div. List, No. 141.)
§ Bill considered in Committee.
§ (In the Committee.)
§ Clause 1 (Short title of Act).
§ MR. BRODRICK (Surrey, Guildford)I rise to move, Sir, that you do now report Progress. I do so for the purpose of calling attention to the very singular position in which we are placed by the hon. Gentleman representing the Government who spoke on the Motion for going into Committee, and informed the House that we were entering upon an absolutely futile proceeding. Well, Sir, the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Henry H. Fowler), having declared that it was a waste of time to go on with the Bill, then proceeded to vote for going into Committee—that is to say, he voted for wasting the time of Parliament and entering on an absolutely futile proceeding. I ask whether the Government intend at this hour to enter on an important measure like this under the circumstances which the hon. Gentleman has described? I am quite aware that a large number of Gentlemen representing Irish constituencies are in their places; but I would point out that the remaining Business on the Paper is of a kind which we ought to be anxious to bring to a practical issue, in order to prevent further loss of Bills occurring by any action of the other Chamber. For these reasons I trust the Motion I am about to make will be agreed to, so that we may not be put to the farce of discussing a measure in detail which, as the hon. Gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury has told us, cannot possibly become law.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, 157 and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. Brodrich.)
§ THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. HENRY H. FOWLER) (Wolverhampton, E.)I simply stated the facts, and the position in which the Bill stood; it is, of course, for the Committee to come to a decision upon those facts. I may state that my sympathy is entirely with this Bill, and my hope is to see it pass into law, although, as I have said, there are great difficulties in the way of its doing so this Session. As I have pointed out, the Committee will form their own conclusion on the subject. I do not see that there are many Amendments on the Paper; and, supposing that the Bill passes through Committee, the Report stage can only he reached on Thursday. I need not go through the other stages that have to be taken, but will merely say that I should like the division to be a proof that this House is in favour of the Bill, and that the Government, who have been in favour of the Bill all along, are not to blame if it does not become law this Session.
§ MR. LEWIS (Londonderry)The position which the Government have taken up with regard to this Bill I regard only as another instance of their submission to the Home Rule Party; and I venture to say that no Member of this House has ever had experience of anything of the kind that has happened to-night. The hon. Gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury has told the Committee that it is absolutely impossible that the Bill can go any further and become law this Session; and, although there is active and important Business on the Paper that we are all anxious should be brought to an issue, we are expected to waste our time and the few remaining days of the Session in discussing the details of this measure. I repeat that the Government are continuing to do what they have been doing all along—that is, pursuing a course of abject submission to the Home Rule Party, which will enable us to show, both inside and outside the House, how much they delight to serve their new masters.
§ MR. SEXTON (Sligo, S.)I point out that if the Committee shares the opinion of the hon. Gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury, and desires that the Bill should pass into law, there is 158 sufficient time for the purpose. The only opponent of the Bill is the hon. Member who has just spoken, and he opposes it because he knows that if it passes into law the Corporation of Derry will be Nationalists, and because he knows that if this Nationalist measure passes the Municipality of Derry will never again have a Tory Member. This is the only matter that underlies the hon. Gentleman's opposition. Another reason why we should go on now is that we can hold a short Sitting to-morrow, at which the Report and third reading of the Bill can be taken; and then, if the Lords pass the Bill, there is nothing easier than for the Government, in the interval before the Session closes, to pass the Bill into law. Under the circumstances, we shall certainly press the Committee on one point, and that is to allow the Bill to go through to-night.
§ SIR ROBERT FOWLER (London)I have to refer to one extraordinary point in the remarks of the hon. Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton), who says that if there should be a Nationalist Mayor in Derry it will be impossible for my hon. Friend to be returned again. But, Sir, I wish to remark that it is not with the Returning Officer that the matter rests of sending Members to this House, but with the electors.
§ MR. TOTTENHAM (Winchester)I also wish to point out to the hon. Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton) that the course he has indicated is practically impossible. I understand that the Resolution has already been taken that the House should adjourn till Thursday; and as it is known that the Dissolution is announced to follow immediately it is simply an absurd waste of the time of the House trying to pass the Bill through further stages here.
§ COLONEL NOLAN (Galway, N.)I remind the Committee that we can take the third reading immediately after the Bill passes through Committee. If, then, the Government are sincere in what they have said, it is perfectly easy for them to go to the Lords with the Bill in time to get it passed into law when it comes back to us.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee proceeded to a Division, and the CHAIRMAN stated he thought the Noes had it; and, his decision being challenged, he directed the 159 Ayes to stand up in their places, and 14 Members only having stood up, the Chairman declared the Noes had it.
§ Original Question again proposed.
§ SIR ROBERT FOWLER (London)On that Question, Sir, I refer again, as I was out of Order on the Question of Progress, to the statement of the hon. Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton), who has told us that if this Bill becomes law the Mayor of Derry would be a Nationalist and would not do his duty. I think, Sir, that the argument of the hon. Member will not commend itself to this House.
§ MR. SEXTON (Sligo, S.)I intended to convey that, as is well known, the Tory Returning Officers play tricks in these matters, and that the Nationalist officers do not.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clauses 2 and 3 agreed, to.
§ Clause 4 (Qualification for municipal franchise).
§ MR. LEWIS (Londonderry)I think there is an inconsistency in this clause. I point out to the Government that this is part of a Bill which professes to assimilate the law of England to the law of Ireland; but, as far as I know, this clause does nothing of the kind. Subsection (C) only requires for the enrolment of a person in the Burgess Roll that he should, during the period of six calendar months next preceding the 31st of August, have resided within the borough, or within seven statute miles of the same. This is clearly not assimilating the law of the two countries.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clause 5 (Exclusions from franchise).
§ MR. LEWIS(speaking amid great interruption): I think it is quite enough that the Government have no intention whatever of taking a becoming course with reference to this Bill, without the voices of hon. Members being drowned by the organized laughter and interruptions of hon. Members below the Gangway. I protest against this treatment, which cannot be justified by the mere presence of 50 Members below the Gangway. The Government, having at first said it was useless to attempt to go on with the Bill, are now deserting their duty and the position they took up before the Bill came into Committee; and, further, 160 when I draw their attention to the fact that there is no assimilation of law as between the two countries, they take not the slightest notice of that grave consideration. Under the circumstances, it is quite impossible that anyone can take part in the discussion of the Bill. We have no assistance from the Government, and, therefore, we can but look on the present proceedings in the same light as they have been described by the Government themselves—that is to say, as a perfect farce; to leave the House, and allow them and hon. Members below the Gangway to play it out by themselves.
§ MR. BRODRICK (Surrey, Guildford)I have one observation to make. Not a single official connected with the Government of Ireland is present on this occasion. No Member of the Government is competent to deal with the Business in the absence of such official, and no Member of the Government is willing to give any directions for the guidance of the Committee in this matter. Under the circumstances, I think the suggestion of the hon. Member for Londonderry will be very properly acted upon.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clauses 6 to 18, inclusive, agreed to.
§ Schedule agreed to.
§ Bill reported, without Amendment.
§ MR. J. F. X. O'BRIEN (Mayo, S.)I would now ask the permission of the House that the Bill be read the third time.
§ MR. SPEAKERIt would not be consistent with my duty to allow the third reading to be taken under the circumstances.
§ Bill to be read the third time upon Thursday.