HC Deb 13 August 1894 vol 28 cc777-9

I promised to make a statement to-day with reference to the future conduct of Public Business. If hon. Gentlemen will look at the Order Paper—I need say nothing about the first three Orders — the Equalisation of Rates Bill, the Railway and Canal Traffic Bill, and the Mines (Eight, Hours) Bill. As to the fourth, Local Courts of Bankruptcy (Ireland) Bill, I understand that there is opposition to that Bill, and therefore it will not be proceeded with. I may say I have taken the usual means to ascertain, as far as I can, how far any of the remaining measures are or are not contentions measures. It has been the object of the Govern- ment to clear the Paper of all Bills which they have reason to believe are contentious measures, and only to leave upon it those which may be regarded as non-contentious. I believe that the Diseases of Animals Bill, which is a consolidation Bill, may be taken as non-contentious, and it will be proceeded with. The Larceny Acts Amendment Bill is, I understand, opposed, and that will not be proceeded with. The Congested Districts Board (Ireland) Bill, which was brought in by my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary and also by the Leader of the Opposition, I hope we may treat as strictly a non-contentious measure. Then comes the Statute Law Revision Bill, and Supply. I do not know whether I may regard Supply as non-contentious. As to the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill, some objection is taken to the form of a Schedule in that Bill. My right hon. Friend the Secretary to the Treasury has taken measures to have that Bill restored to its original form, and therefore I hope there will be no further objection to it. The Prevention of Cruelty to Children Bill is a measure to which, I think, no objection is taken, and the Copyhold Consolidation Bill is in a similar position. With regard to the Coal Mines (Check Weigher) Bill, I believe it is desired to make sonic observations upon it, but it is not substantially opposed. The measures I have mentioned—with the two exceptions I have indicated—are, I believe, strictly non-contentious. I understand that with reference to other Bills not promoted by the Government, they will not be proceeded with, and the time of the House shall not be confined to those Bills to which I have now referred. I do not know that I have anything further to say on the subject. Later on, perhaps, it may be necessary, as is usual when we get still nearer the close of the Session, to have a general Order suspending the Twelve o'clock Rule, not with a view to late Sittings, but in order to conclude the business.

* SIR M. HICKS-BEACH () Bristol, W.

Are we to understand that to-night and to-morrow will be devoted to the Mines (Eight Hours) Bill, and Supply be taken on Wednesday?


No; India comes after the Eight Hours Bill. I am not at the present moment in a position to say what time will be required for the discussion of the Eight Hours Bill, hut as soon as that is over we shall proceed with the Indian discussion and then with Supply.

* SIR F. S. POWELL () Wigan

Can the right hon. Gentleman fix a date for the Education Vote?


I think it would be very inconvenient to take Supply otherwise than in its regular course.

MR. FLYNN () Cork, N.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the vast majority of the Irish Members are in favour of the Local Courts of Bankruptcy (Ireland) Bill, and that it is only opposed by a small knot of Dublin solicitors?


I am afraid it does not come within the category of unopposed Bills, especially if it is opposed by solicitors.

MR. COHEN () Islington, E.

Do we understand that the discussion on India on Wednesday is contingent upon the passing of the Eight Hours Bill through all its stages to-day or to-morrow?


If all the stages were finished to-day the Indian business would be taken to-morrow.