§ MR. HENRY H. FOWLER (Wolverhampton, E.)asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether any of the Private Bills referred to the Police and Sanitary Regulations Committee contain clauses imposing restrictions on the liberty of the subject not imposed by the existing law; whether the Home Office has reported against these restrictions being enacted; and, whether, in the event of the Police and Sanitary Regulations Committee inserting these clauses, he will call the attention of the House to these clauses before the Bills containing them are passed?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE (Mr. MATTHEWS) (Birmingham, E.)There were clauses against Sunday processions in streets in the Kingston Improvement Bill, the Lancaster Corporation Bill, and the Llanelly Local Board Bill. In the case of the Kingston Bill, the clause was withdrawn by the Promoters. The clause in the Lancaster Bill has been struck out before the Committee this afternoon. The Llanelly Bill has not yet been disposed of. In all three cases the Home Office reported adversely to the clause against processions, as being matter for general legislation. The Under Secretary of State has, at my request, been in communication with the Chairman of the Select Committee on Police and Sanitary Regulations, and with the counsel to Mr. Speaker; with the result that the Chairman has promised to consult the Committee as to the possibility of bringing to the notice of the House, in a manner more effective than that hitherto adopted, those matters upon which the Standing Orders bind the Committee to make a Special Report. I should be unwilling to interfere with the discretion which the Standing Orders show that this House intended to vest in the Committee, and which it exercises after hearing local evidence and obtaining local information not usually accessible to any Public Department. Either the House must trust the Committee to exercise the powers which the Standing Orders give it, or must withdraw those powers altogether.