DEEDS OF ARRANGEMENT (No. 2) (Hansard, 6 September 1887)

§ MR. CLANCY (Dublin Co., N.)
I beg to move that the Chairman do report Progress. No explanation has been given of this Bill, and among the Members now present there are few lawyers, and this is a lawyer's Bill. This is one of the many grounds upon which I might support this Motion. Another ground is that we require some explanation of the effect of the Bill upon existing deeds of arrangement, especially as regards Ireland. There are doubts in the minds of some as to how the Bill will affect deeds of arrangement not registered.

§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir RICHARD WEBSTER) (Isle of Wight)
The hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Clancy) has quite forgotten the history of this Bill, or he could not possibly have made the observations he did. The Bill is actually the same, word for word, as when it went through the House on a former occasion, and every clause was carefully discussed. The hon. Member for Kilkenny discussed the Bill from an Irish point of view, and proposed several Amendments, which I accepted. The Bill was read a third time with the full assent of the House, including many Irish Members; but owing to a technical slip it became a lapsed Order, and had to be re-introduced, and the stages of the Bill had to be repeated. I am sure the hon. Member cannot be aware of this, and cannot require me to repeat my statements in reference to the Bill, 1516 or give Members the trouble of walking through the Lobbies. There are no doubt stages of other Bills to get through, and if he insists I will not proceed with this; but I appeal to the hon. Member, now he knows the state of the facts, to allow the Bill to go through Committee.

§ MR. CLANCY
I respect my hon. Friend the Member for Kilkenny very highly; but it is not because he sets his imprimation on the Bill that we should all do the same.

§ SIR RICHARD WEBSTER
You discussed it in Committee.

§ MR. CLANCY
The hon. and learned Gentleman is mistaken. I never said a word upon it. I never saw or heard of the Bill before. Another reason why we should not proceed in spite of the hon. and learned Gentleman's assurances is that I myself intended to move an Amendment to Clause 5.

THE CHAIRMAN
Clause 5 has been disposed of.

§ MR. CLANCY
I only say I would have moved an Amendment if I had had an opportunity. It is an additional reason why Progress should be reported. Another reason is, that although the explanation given of the character of the Bill looks very plausible, last night an explanation was given of another Bill, which according to a letter in The Times this morning—

THE CHAIRMAN
I must ask the hon. Gentleman to confine his observations to the Motion to report Progress.

§ MR. CLANCY
I thought my observations were relevant to that.

§ DR. TANNER (Cork Co., Mid)
I would ask the Attorney General, out of justice to himself, and consideration for the Committee, to defer further discussion of this Bill. On the last occasion when this Deeds of Arrangement Bill was before the House, I asked him to defer it until such time as hon. Members who took an interest in it were present to take part in the discussion. I hope the good sense of the hon. and learned Gentleman will prompt him on this occasion to some deed of arrangement that will conduce to the benefit of himself and the House.

§ COLONEL NOLAN (Galway, N.)
I now move the Motion to report Progress, and I think the Attorney General will be disposed to assent to it.

§ SIR RICHARD WEBSTER
Of course, there is other Business to be got through, and I did say I would not press this against any resistance. But, inasmuch as I presume the other clauses will be taken without opposition, they may be taken to-morrow, and we need not proceed further now.

§ MR. SEXTON
I have no objection intrinsically to the Bill, but I should not be surprised, after the extraordinary conduct of the Government to-night in relation to the case of outrage I felt it my duty to put before the House, I should not be surprised if this and other Bills met with opposition.