HC Deb 30 July 1888 vol 329 cc760-1
MR. DILLWYN (Swansea, Town)

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether, in view of the great amount of Business remaining to be transacted before the proposed adjournment of the House next month, and considering the discussion to which the Tithe Rent-Charge Bills are certain to give rise, he will defer their further consideration till the November Session?

SIR JOHN SWINBURNE (Staffordshire, Lichfield)

asked, Whether it is still the intention of the Government to take either of the Tithe Rent-Charge Bills during the present Sittings; and, if so, whether in consideration of the considerable amount of opposition to the Bills, he will arrange to give ample Notice of the day on which they will be taken?

MR. STANLEY LEIGHTON (Shropshire, Oswestry)

asked, Whether, in view of the dissatisfaction which prevails in some parts of the United Kingdom with the law relating to the payment and recovery of tithe rent-charge, and of the fact that two Bills have been introduced by the Government for the purpose of abolishing the method of recovering tithe rent-charge by distress on the tenants' property, and of relieving them from the direct payment of the charge, he will take steps to insure the passing of both Bills before the adjournment of the House?

MR. COBB (Warwick, S.E., Rugby)

asked, Whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that a feeling prevails among a considerable number of Members on the Opposition side of the House that the Business which he named on Thursday last as necessary to be completed before the adjournment cannot be got through, without unduly preventing reasonable discussion, before the end of August at the earliest; whether he will reconsider the subject, and, for the convenience of Members, make at an early date a further statement as to the conduct of Public Business, and indicate more definitely the date of the adjournment; and, whether, having regard to the health and necessary recreation of Members, he will undertake that a period of not less than three months shall intervene between the adjournment and the Autumn Sitting?

THE FIRST LORD (Mr. W. H. SMITH) (Strand, Westminster)

, in reply, said, he was unable to make any addition to the statement he made on Thursday last. He could only say that the Government felt it to be their duty to ask the House to consider the Tithes Bill before the adjournment, because they were responsible for the peace and good order of the country, and they could not discharge their duty efficiently in that respect without asking that adequate consideration should be given to those Bills. The Government would make the necessary arrangements for the period of adjournment, so that Members might enjoy that amount of recreation which was essential to them after their labours; but some regard must be had to public necessity and public interest.

SIR JOHN SWINBURNE

inquired, whether the right hon. Gentleman would give ample Notice as to when the Tithe Bills would be taken?

MR. W. H. SMITH

The hon. Member has been informed that the Bills will be taken, and that is all the Notice I can give him.