SECOND READING. (Hansard, 10 May 1886)

§ MR. BUCHANAN (Edinburgh, W.)
I am somewhat surprised that, notwithstanding the request which was made to my right hon. and learned Friend early in the evening, he proposes to ask the House to go on with the second reading of this Bill at 2 o'clock in the morning. I think that it needs no argument to persuade the House not to go on now with a measure containing more than 500 clauses, independently of numerous Schedules, and which was only issued to hon. Members this morning. Those who are interested in the measure have not yet had an opportunity of seeing a copy of the Bill.

THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. B. BALFOUR)&c.) (Clackmannan,
I had no reason whatever to expect that there would be any opposition to the second reading of the Bill. The measure has now been before the country for two years, and during two Sessions it has passed through the House of Lords. It has also been submitted to a Select Committee, and its provisions examined with great care. It has now come down to this House with the Amendments which have been introduced into it by the Select Committee and the House of Lords. If, however, it is desired to have further time, I have no objection to postpone the second reading until Monday.

MR. DALRYMPLE (Ipswich)
I think the protest which has been made by the hon. Member for West Edinburgh (Mr. Buchanan) is a very unnecessary one. I am satisfied that if the text of the Bill had been in the hands of hon. Members for a month they would not have looked at it more than they have done now. It is a matter which has already been before the House more than once, and the whole question has been thoroughly discussed in a Select Committee in 1884; and I know of no one whose objections, and even prejudices, were more laboriously considered by the Select Committee than those of the hon. Member. The truth is that this is not a Bill which could possibly be discussed on the second reading. It is entirely a Bill of details, and of details which have been threshed out both in this and in the other House of Parliament.

§ MR. J. WILSON (Edinburgh, Central)
The Bill was only issued this morning, and cannot reach Edinburgh until to-morrow. It is, therefore, most unreasonable to take it at this hour of the morning; and I feel bound to join in the protest which my hon. Colleague (Mr. Buchanan) has made.

§ MR. BUCHANAN
I understood the right hon. and learned Lord Advocate to put off the second reading until Monday.

§ MR. SPEAKER
The right hon. and learned Gentleman moved the second reading of the Bill.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Sir WILLIAM HARCOURT) (Derby)
It is for the House to decide what course it is prepared to take. The Government have no desire to press the second reading against the strong feeling of the House. I have known something of the Bill in former days, and I know that it is entirely a Bill of details. My hon. Friend behind me (Mr. J. Wilson) seems to think that it is a case of hasty legislation, or what was once described by Mr. Wyndham as a coup de main on the part of the Government. It would, however, be just as fair to talk of a coup de main in the case of a Chancery suit. It is impossible to effect a coup de main upon a Bill of 500 clauses. At the same time, it is most desirable to have the Bill read a second time, so that we may be able to come to a consideration of the details in Committee. At the present moment there are a considerable number of Scotch Members in the House, and I imagine that they are in favour of going on with the Bill. It is for them to say whether they desire to do so or not.

§ DR. CAMERON (Glasgow, College)
I hope the Government will not press the second reading of the Bill. It is a very important Bill, and has excited in bygone years a considerable amount of controversy. It contains a variety of principles, and when it was last before the House it was referred to a Select Committee, and the manner in which it was gone into by that Committee certainly excited much controversy in Scotland. A majority of the Members of that Committee are not now Members of this House. A new House has sprung into existence, and I certainly do not think the Lord Advocate would lose much by acceding to the request of my 690 hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh (Mr. Buchanan) that the Bill shall be postponed until, at all events, our constituents shall have had an opportunity of making themselves acquainted with the nature of its provisions. I think the debate ought to be adjourned.

§ MR. SPEAKER
Does the hon. Member move the adjournment of the debate?

§ DR. CAMERON
Yes; I will move that the debate be now adjourned.

§ THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. HENRY H. FOWLER) (Wolverhampton, E.)
The Government have no objection.