§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. W. H. SMITH) (Strand, Westminster)I have received a communication from the other side of the House, to the effect that it would be agreeable to hon. Members that I should now move that the House, at its rising, adjourn till Tuesday next, and if that is the desire of hon. Gentlemen on both sides I will conclude with that Motion. The Bill for the amendment of the Criminal Law in Ireland stands on the Paper for to-day; and under these circumstances, if this Motion is accepted, the Bill will not be proceeded with today, but will be taken again on Tuesday next. I think it is right that hon. Gentlemen on both sides of the House should know that that is the arrangement. I understand the Motion will be 700 accepted, so as not to involve delay and debate. That, I believe, is the wish of both sides of the House, in order to enable Gentlemen to get away by the afternoon train. In making this Motion I am carrying out the engagement I made to the House a few days ago—that if it was the desire of the House generally that this step should be taken I would do everything in my power to meet that wish; and it is in accordance with that wish that I now make the Motion that the House, at its rising, do adjourn till Tuesday next.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House will, at the rising of the House this day, adjourn till Tuesday next."—(Mr. William Henry Smith.)
§ MR. SEXTON (Belfast, W.)presumed that there would be no attempt to make progress with any of the Government Orders of the Day at that Sitting.
§ MR. W. H. SMITHNo, Sir; nothing.
§ MR. CHILDERS (Edinburgh, S.)said that, though he would not oppose the Motion which the right hon. Gentleman had made, he and those who sat near him did not approve of the holiday being so short.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR (Donegal, E.)asked, when it was proposed to take the second reading of the Coal Mines, &c, Regulation Bill, as he understood the Representatives of mining constituencies were anxious to have some discussion on the subject?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. MATTHEWS) (Birmingham, E.), in reply, said, that if hon. Members wished to have a discussion on the second reading of this Bill, he must fix a day on which discussion could be taken; but he had been under the impression that a second reading discussion would not be necessary, as all the points that arose on the Bill were really points for Committee.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, that he had gathered from consultation with hon. Members specially interested in the measure that it was desirable to have it discussed on the second reading.
§ MR. BIGGAR (Cavan, W.)also urged that the Representatives of the miners wished to have the Bill discussed on the second reading at an hour when the debate on it could be duly reported.
§ MR. TOMLINSON (Preston)speaking for colliery proprietors, said, that they would be quite content that the Bill should be taken without a discussion on the second reading. It was one in which the safety of miners was deeply concerned; but he understood that the Bill was not to be discussed in a hostile spirit, and there would be an opportunity afforded to those who desired to argue questions of principle on the Motion for going into Committee. He would suggest that that would be the proper stage at which to take any discussion.
§ THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. STUART-WORTLEY) (Sheffield, Hallam)said, he had full reason to believe that not only the hon. Member for Morpeth (Mr. Burt), but also the hon. Member for the Wansbeck Division of Northumberland (Mr. Fenwick), and the hon. Member for Mid Durham (Mr. W. Crawford)—all Representatives of the miners—had been fully prepared and willing that the Bill should be read a second time without discussion to-day.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, that some of the hon. Members whom the hon. Gentleman had just mentioned were the very Members whom he had consulted on that subject.
§ Motion agreed to.
§ House adjourned at Three o'clock p.m. till Tuesday next.