HC Deb 29 April 1890 vol 343 cc1750-2

Order for Second Reading read.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."

(12.53.) DR. TANNER (Cork, Mid)

I regret that the hon. Member should endeavour at this unreasonably late hour to force on this Bill without any explanation of its provisions, or any statement as to the benefits it may be supposed to confer on the people. The hon. Gentleman asked me earlier this evening not to oppose the Second Reading when reached. The hon. Gentleman knows very well he cannot expect very much consideration at our hands, but I will not go into that matter. I desire, however, to explain that the right hon. Baronet the Member for the University of London (Sir J. Lubbock) brought in a Bill dealing with this very question, and that subsequent to the introduction of that measure the hon. Member (Mr. Maple), against whom many grave accusations in connection with sweating in the City of London have been made, introduced his Bill to jockey the measure of the right hon. Baronet. The right hon. Baronet will, perhaps, excuse my speaking in this way. He differs from the Party to which I belong on the question of Home Rule; but I know he is far more competent to deal with this matter than the hon. Member opposite. Certainly, as long as I remain in the House, I shall try to promote fair play between Parties. I beg to move the adjournment of the Debate.

MR. CALDWELL (Glasgow, St. Rollox)

seconded the Motion.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned."—(Dr. Tanner.)

*SIR J. LUBBOCK (London University)

I appeal to the hon. Gentleman to withdraw his Motion and allow the Bill to be read a second time. I do not pretend that I entirely agree with the proposals in the Bill, but I would be glad if the House would send this Bill and also my Bill to a Select Committee. I think we might feel confident that a Committee, after hearing the opinions of the mercan- tile community, would arrive at a wise decision. I therefore appeal to the hon. Gentleman to withdraw the Motion for the adjournment of the Debate and to allow both Bills to go to a Committee.

MR. ESSLEMONT (Aberdeen, E.)

This is a question affecting the commercial community, and I do not think we should be expected to pass the Second Reading without a word of explanation from the Mover. The commercial community of London cannot be regulated by the commercial community of the country, and vice versâ. I trust the Motion for adjournment will not be withdrawn, and that if this legislation is brought on it will be at a time when hon. Members can have an opportunity of expressing the opinion of their constituents.

*MR. J. E. ELLIS (Nottingham, Rushcliffe)

We are all aware of the anxious care which the hon. Baronet (Sir J. Lubbock) has given to the subject. But this Bill stands on an entirely different footing to the Bill of the right hon. Baronet, and it seems to me it would be unworthy of the House to pass the Second Reading of such a Bill without the slightest explanation from the Mover.

MR. BAUMANN (Peckham)

I do earnestly hope that both this Bill and that of the right hon. Baronet may be referred to a Select Committee; but if such a proceeding is prevented, I hope the public of London will see that the fault does not rest with the right hon. Baronet or the hon. Member for Dulwich.


I trust the House will excuse my pressing the Motion for adjournment. In a spirit of fair play——

It being One of the clock, the Debate stood adjourned till to-morrow, and M. Speaker adjourned the House without Question put.

House adjourned at One o'clock.