COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 25 July 1887)

§ THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDER SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Colonel KING-HARMAN) (Kent, Isle of Thanet)
I am afraid I must object to this. Since the Bill was introduced Amendments were introduced into the Metropolitan Open Spaces Bill, many of which I had the honour of moving myself, with the distinct understanding, as I believed, that those Amendments would take the place of this Bill, which I quite expected would be withdrawn, and am now surprised to find still on the Paper. I beg to move the adjournment of the debate.

§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Longford, N.)
I think the right hon. and gallant Gentleman might have found a less prejudiced witness. When he was a private Member he opposed a similar Bill to this; but having acquired his present position, on which I congratulate him, he seemed to become a friend to the Bill, at least to the extent of not using his official position to obstruct it. But having again, as I understand, assumed a position of more freedom and less responsibility, and his official Chief being absent, he now figures as an opponent of the Bill. It is true that, to some extent, a series of Amendments introduced into the Bill of the hon. Baronet the Member for the University of London (Sir John Lubbock) applied the Metropolitan Open Spaces Bill to Dublin; but there are a number of valuable provisions contained in this Bill, and the proposal I make to the Government is this, and I hope the right hon. and gallant Gentleman will accept it—we desire to reciprocate favours the Government have extended to us. Let us get the Speaker out of the Chair, and we will agree not to proceed further with the Bill unless we come to an arrangement with the Government as to its clauses. But let us get this stage. "We admit the power of the Government to stop us to-night; we admit their power to crush us in Committee; besides, they have the House of Lords behind them. But let them allow us to get the Bill into Committee, and after that, unless we can come to an understanding with the Government, I will recommend the hon. Member for Dublin and the Lord Mayor to abandon the Bill, for, of course, we 2010 have no hope of carrying a Bill against the Government at this period of the Session. I ask the Government to withdraw opposition now, and we promise not to persevere with the Bill unless we can come to some terms of accommodation with Her Majesty's Government.

§ MR. T. W. RUSSELL (Tyrone, S.)
I never could understand why this Bill was blocked. What is its object? One that we might suppose both sides would facilitate—the conversion of old burying grounds in the City of Dublin into pleasant open spaces.

§ COLONEL KING-HARMAN
This was all done in the other Bill.

§ MR. T. W. RUSSELL
Yes; but done in a way that is unworkable for Dublin. Does the right hon. and gallant Gentleman know that the Bill had the approval of the late Chief Secretary, Sir Michael Hicks-Beach? ["Order !"] I suppose I may name him now he is unfortunately absent. If that right hon. Gentleman had continued Chief Secretary this Bill would certainly be law now. It is a cruelty to the waifs and strays of Dublin to block the Bill, and I hope the Government will not persist in their opposition.

§ THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. RITCHIE) (Tower Hamlets, St. George's)
I think the hon. Member cannot be aware that the Amendments to the Bill of the hon. Baronet the Member for the University of London entirely meet the points he has raised. I was compelled to take some interest in that Bill, and can bear out what my right hon. and gallant Friend says, that it was clearly understood that the other Bill would not be proceeded with, because what was proposed to be done by the one Bill was accomplished by Amendments inserted in the other.

§ DR. TANNER (Cork Co., Mid)
I think that right hon. Gentlemen are labouring under some mistake. What really occurred was this. When the Bill was first of all put upon the Notice Paper, it was blocked by a couple of hon. Members who sit on the Tory side below the Gangway. Then, when the Metropolitan Open Spaces Bill of the hon. Baronet was introduced, I recollect putting down a block to it. It is not often that I find myself in agreement with the hon. Member for South Tyrone (Mr. T. W. RUSSELL), but I do in regard to this Bill, which, as he says, had the 2011 approval of the late Chief Secretary. Well, in deference to remonstrances addressed to me by several hon. Members, I withdrew my opposition to the Metropolitan Open Spaces Bill, and the hon. Member for the University of London said he would try to induce Tory Members to take off the block from this Bill. I merely rise to make this explanation, and to let the Parliamentary Under Secretary for Ireland know that really the opposition that existed to this Bill was not opposition to its principle or proposals, but a sort of desultory opposition offered by hon. Gentlemen below the Gangway opposite who were not altogether pleased with the action we took upon other Bills.

§ THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (Mr. COURTNEY) (Cornwall, Bodmin)
I really hope the Government will accept the offer made by the hon. and learned Member for North Longford (Mr. T. M. Healy) who, I presume, spoke on behalf of his Friends. They offer not to proceed with the Bill except by arrangement with the Government; their only wish now is to take a formal stage, in order to prevent constant opposition to the Motion. We shall certainly save time by adopting the course suggested.

§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. GIBSON) (Liverpool, Walton)
On the understanding which I understand was offered that the Government shall exercise control over the further progress of the Bill I think we may agree to the proposal.