CHAIRMAN OF THE PARISH COUNCILS (SCOTLAND) BILL. (Hansard, 14 March 1898)

§ MR. J. CALDWELL (Lanark, Mid)
This, Sir, is an illustration of the way business is rushed through unexpectedly. This is a Bill which was evidently not expected to be reached at this particular time, all the more so that there is now an Instruction to extend its provisions. The Bill is brought in by the Lord Advocate, and it proposed to confer upon the Chairmen of District Councils in Scotland the powers conferred upon the Chairmen of District Councils in England. Now, so far as that part of the Bill is concerned there was no practical opposition to it, but, on the other hand, it is to be borne in mind that there were others besides the chairmen of Councils who were ex-officio Justices of the Peace, and, therefore, it was that the matter was brought under the notice of the Lord Advocate, and this Bill was introduced, dealing not only with chairmen of Councils, but also magistrates and others who by virtue of their office in Scotland were Justices of the Peace. So far as regards ex-officio Justices of the Peace, I have no objection whatever to the power being granted to them, but I think we have come to the point now at which this power, if it is to be granted at all, ought to be granted not merely in the case of Scotland, but also in the case of England and Ireland as well. If it is in order, I would be inclined to move an Amendment to that effect. I do not know, Sir, whether you would accept such an Amendment.

THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (Mr. GRANT LAWSON)
The hon. Member can not move what would be practically a second Instruction.

§ MR. CALDWELL
However, Sir, I am quite entitled to say this: the Bill was brought in evidently in an imperfect condition, because it was to confer upon chairmen of Parish Councils certain powers, and it is now to be extended to other persons, who are ex-officio Justices of the Peace. That is going far beyond the scope of the Bill, as originally introduced. What I suggest is this: that, instead of adopting an Instruction now which will widen the scope of the Bill, the proper course would be that this Bill should be withdrawn, and a new Bill should be brought in, to apply not only to chairmen of Parish Councils, but to ex-officio Justices of the Peace. If this is 1629 done we should have an opportunity of proposing that the Bill should apply, not only in the case of Scotland, but in the case of Ireland and England.

§ *THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. A. GRAHAM MURRAY,) Buteshire
I really think the hon. Member is rather ungrateful. The Bill, as originally introduced, was intended to assimilate the law of Scotland to that of England, and to allow the chairman of a Parish Council to become a Justice of the Peace without having to repeat the oath and pay fees on the occasion of each re-election. As soon as the Bill appeared on the Paper, representations were made to me from several hon. Gentlemen, including some representations from the hon. Member for Mid Lanark himself, to the effect that we ought not to stop there, but that we should extend the privilege to all Justices of the Peace. Well, that is exactly what this Instruction does. I am, therefore, absolutely unable to follow the reasons for which the hon. Member now opposes the Instruction.