§ Bill considered in Committee.
§ (In the Committee.)
§ Clause 1.
§ THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. BRYCE,) Aberdeen, S.
said, this was a Bill as to which there was no difference of opinion among those affected. The measure had been carefully considered by a strong Committee, and would be of the greatest advantage to the Merchant Service. It was really a Consolidation Bill, and brought together a number of Acts in regard to which there had been confusion. The late Solicitor General was a Member of the Committee and agreed with the Bill. He thought it was understood that the Bill was not to be debated.
§ MR. CONYBEARE (Cornwall, Camborne)
said, he should like to have an assurance that there were no new Regulations in the Bill.
§ SIR E. CLARKE (Plymouth)
said, this Bill was carefully examined by the Committee, but some question arose as to its provisions, and the parties were invited to appear before the Committee, when they seemed to be in agreement.
§ MR. PENROSE FITZGERALD
The Bill we are now discussing was placed in our hands this morning. I move to report Progress.
§ COLONEL HOWARD VINCENT
Has this Bill been sent to the Chamber of Shipping, and has it been reported upon by them? I myself only received it this morning.
§ MR. MUNDELLA (Sheffield, Brightside)
said, he hoped this Motion would not be persisted in. He did not think there was a shipowner or merchant seaman in England who was not anxious that this Bill should pass. It was a Bill consolidating 40 or 50 Acts extending over the last 20 years, and he hoped that such a measure would be allowed to go through. The Bill was circulated last year and referred to a Committee, whose work, he thought he might say, was done in a thorough manner.
§ MR. BUCKNILL (Surrey, Epsom)
said, when the Bill was introduced last Session he had an opportunity of going through it, and he told the right hon. Member who had just spoken that the Bill was not in any sense a mere consolidation Bill, and that view was carried out by the Committee, which, after one or two sittings, required that it should be reprinted.
§ MR. BRYCE
said, it was true there were verbal alterations, as there were bound to be in a consolidation Bill. As regarded the substance of the Bill, the Committee, which was a strong one, presided over by the Lord Chancellor, and which had the advantage of including a representative of the shipowners in the person of the hon. Member for West Bristol, assured him that it contained nothing but what appeared in existing 1363 enactments. The House might, therefore, accept the measure as a bonâ fide consolidation Bill.
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Louth, N.)
said, the Committee took enormous pains to see that there was no departure made from the existing law. The draftsman was before them, and he was instructed to see that the Bill was in accordance with the existing Statutes. If work of this kind was to be carried out the House must trust the Committee.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress; and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. Penrose Fitzgerald.)
§ Motion agreed to.
§ Committee report Progress; to sit again To-morrow.