Page 27, line 10, leave out sub-section 2."—(Mr. M. Healy.)
§ MR. M. HEALY
I wish to ask if the Government have considered the case of a county surveyor. He is compelled to give certain certificates that work is done. The words of this section seem to suggest that it is the county council that should give the certificate, 198 but I think that certain powers vested in the county surveyor at present ought not to be vested in the county council as a body.
§ MR. GERALD BALFOUR
The Act transfers to the county council not only he powers of the grand jury but also the powers of their officers. However, I will consider the point raised by the honourable Member.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Page 27, line 13, at end, add—
'Except so far as the sheriff or the justices may require for the administration of justice the use of any court-house, sessions house, or other county building under his or their custody or control, the county council may use the same for the purpose of the execution of their duties, and if any difference arises between the sheriff or justices and the county councils as to such use, or as to the remuneration of any court keeper or other officer, such difference shall be determined by the Lord Lieutenant,'"—(Mr. Gerald Balfour.)
Further Amendment proposed—
In line 3 of proposed Amendment after word 'use' insert 'control and manage.'"—(Mr. Clancy.)
§ MR. CLANCY
said those court-houses were really the property of the county, and had been erected at the cost of the ratepayers.
That those words be inserted in the proposed Amendment.
§ * MR. ATKINSON
said the primary purpose of the court-houses was the administration of justice, and therefore it was necessary to place them under the control of the sheriff and not of the county council, which was not responsible for the administration of justice.
§ MR. CLANCY
said the right honourable and learned Gentleman had only just explained the grievance of which he 199 complained. The sheriff would control and manage the court-houses, and would be able to keep them under his charge. They admitted at once that the sheriff ought to have control of the court-house when it was required for business of the court, and, if necessary, he would be willing to accept any words which would give them that control; but when control was not required for business purposes it was monstrous that the county council should not have control. It was a moot question whether the grand jury should have the right to manage and control these court-houses, but he believed there was a judicial decision to the effect that the sheriff had the control. This would now be perpetuated.
§ * MR. ATKINSON
said he had explained that the officer who had to make all the necessary arrangements was the high sheriff. The primary object was that justice should be administered in these buildings.
§ MR. CLANCY
said the Amendment provided—Except so far as the sheriff or justices might require for the administration of justice the use of any county building under his or their control, the county council might use the same," etc.The county council were under no obligation to provide for the administration of justice.
§ MR. TULLY (Leitrim, S.)
said that in the smaller towns of Ireland the sub-sheriff was the gentleman who controlled the use of the court-house, and when people wanted it they applied for the use of the building. He knew cases where, when they wanted the courthouse for entertainments for charitable purposes they had been refused, while the building was always at the disposal of the local freemason lodge. They wanted the county or district council to have power in this matter, and he hoped it would be closely looked into.
MR. J. H. M. CAMPBELL
said he would like the Attorney General for Ireland to explain how the question was likely to apply in the case of county 200 boroughs. For instance, would the sheriff of the city of Belfast or the sheriff of the county of Antrim have control? In the case of the city of Dublin also, he would like to know how the authority was to be divided in the event of a conflict between the county and city sheriff.
MR. T. M. HEALY
said the Dublin Corporation had to provide every year £1,600 for salaries for officials of the Green Street court-house, not one of whom they could appoint. They had not the right to appoint any officer; it was entirely in charge of the sheriff of the city.
§ * MR. ATKINSON
Part of the building is under the jurisdiction of the High Sheriff of the county of Cork, and part is under the jurisdiction of the city of Cork, although both buildings are under the same roof. The only question that might arise would be between the city and the county.
§ * MR. SERJEANT HEMPHILL
I should like to say the Recorder of Dublin has a distinct court, and that it is necessary for this court to make some provision, because, when it was desired that the Recorder should go down to the other court and try civil cases there, he decided that he had no jurisdiction outside his own particular court.
§ MR. M. HEALY
I have carefully read this Amendment of the Government, and it seems to me to be a most insidious proposal. At first I did not quite understand it, and I am not quite sure that I understand it now; but after giving it the best examination that I can, it appears to me that its operation will be to cut down the rights of the county council. Now, Sir, as this Bill was originally drawn, it did not contain one word upon the subject of the county proper. All that was to be done by an Order in Council. There is a clause in the Bill to enable an Order in Council to be made, but in the Bill as it stood originally there is no reference whatever to the county proper. In the Order of Council there is a most elaborate Order as to the county proper, 201 which hands it all over to the county councils, and leaves it to them to do anything they like, so long as they keep within the law. Now come in those insidious words—The county council may use, the same for the purposes of the execution of their duties.But supposing, Sir, the county council wished, as the honourable Member pointed out might very well occur, to let the court-house for a party or for a concert for charitable purposes—in many of the Irish towns the only public building where public entertainments can be held is the court-house. That is the only building available that can be used for concerts, parties, and the like, and by these words the right honourable Gentleman practically suppresses that, and he prevents the county council from allowing the court-house to be used for such a harmless and proper purpose. Is that the deliberate attempt of this Amendment? Is it intended to take away from the county councils what the Order in Council deliberately gave to them? The right honourable Gentleman says that these words are not put in for such a reason; but, unless he can give me any explanation to the contrary, I must suppose that he conceived that the powers given by the Order in Council were too large, and he wants to cut those powers down.
Before the right honourable Gentleman replies, I wish it to be made quite clear what position he intends shall be taken up under this clause, what the position of the corporations and the county councils will be in connection with the control of these courthouses. I entirely agree with what has fallen from the honourable and learned Member for St. Stephen's Green. I do not understand what power this clause is intended to exercise in the future. My own experience of Dublin is that the corporation is the proper party to have control over the work of these court-houses.
§ SIR T. ESMONDE
I do not go into the question of counties and cities, because I am not so much concerned in that matter; but, so far as the ordinary 202 county council goes, I think this is a most extraordinary proposal on the part of the Government. Heretofore the high sheriff and the grand jury had the control of the court-house, and the question I desire to ask is, Why should not the county councils, who are to have the use of these court-houses for their duties, have the control of them, subject, of course, to the use of the judges for the purposes of justice? It seems to me, from the wording of this Amendment of the Chief Secretary, that the county council may use the same, but the right of the county councils to do so is merely subject to the goodwill and pleasure of the sheriff. It says here, "They may use it." It seems to me that it is a very curious Amendment. I think the Government ought to allow the county councils to have a determining voice in their administration and their occupation. The honourable Member opposite was anxious that the various leagues should be able to have their meetings in the courthouse, but I have never yet heard of an Irish court-house being used for the purposes of an Irish Nationalist league. Of course, I am aware they have been used for the purposes of the Primrose League, and if they are used for the Primrose League I cannot, for my own part, see why they cannot be used by the National League, or any other organisation which ought to be given similar facilities. When the Government are about to bring in a reform in the administration of local affairs in Ireland, I should have thought that the least which they could do would be to give the county councils, who pay the larger amount for the maintenance of the court-houses and for the building of them, the supreme power of administering them. That is the right of the county council, and I think the Amendment of the right honourable Gentleman is inexpedient.
§ MR. GERALD BALFOUR
The honourable Member seems to be under the impression that we are endeavouring to take away from the county councils powers which would, as successors of the grand juries of Ireland, devolve upon them. That is not quite so. What we are doing is to give them 203 the management of the court-houses in exactly the same manner as the grand juries managed them. The grand juries paid exactly the same amount as the county council will have to pay hereafter, but the grand juries were not supreme in the management of the courthouses. That control remained with the sheriff. I am not of opinion that a power not possessed by the grand juries of Ireland should be possessed by the county councils. Somebody must have control, and I still think the control ought to remain with the sheriff. If a building was required for some of these other purposes which have been referred to, then a proper application would be made to the sheriff, and the sheriff would naturally grant the necessary leave. [Loud cries of "No, no!"] Well, I think he would; but, in any case, it would not be a right thing, having regard to the primary uses for which they were built, and to which they would be put, that they should be taken out of the control of the sheriff. Therefore, he will have the control.
§ * MR. SERJEANT HEMPHILL
The Chief Secretary says the primary use of the court is for the administration of justice. That is so, but it appears to me that he could easily meet the views of both sides by giving the control to the county council, adding something in the form of a proviso which would provide that the sheriff or the justices "may use any court sessions house of county buildings when required for the administration of justice." Subject to that, he might leave the control with the county council; give them the control, with the right of usor on the part of the sheriff or justices.
§ SIR THOMAS LEA (Londonderry, S.)
I do not clearly understand whether the county council of county Londonderry would be allowed the use of the city offices of the county council only, with the permission of the City of Londonderry Council, or whether they would be able to meet in any other part of the county that they please. The Attorney General's constituents are equally interested in this matter with mine, and I should like to know whether 204 they would be able to meet in the city court-house.
§ * MR. ATKINSON
They would never require to meet in the court-house, because there is a very fine Corporation Hall in which they would be able to meet; but at the same time they would be able to meet in the city court-house if they pleased.
§ * MR. DILLON
I cannot see any reason why the county council should not have the control and the management of the court-houses, subject to the right of the sheriff, to make use of them when the needs of justice required their use. As I understand, the point that has been raised by the honourable Member for North Dublin would be met by such a concession, and it would, in my opinion, be very expedient. What the Chief Secretary admitted in his speech was that this Amendment modifies the powers which we thought were given to us by the Order in Council—that is, the control and management of the court-houses, etc. What was said in response to the honourable Member for North Dublin. He said that if the county council, who paid for these buildings, and whose property they are, desired to have the use of them for a charitable concert, or a political or non-political meeting, so far as that goes they could apply to the high sheriff, and presumably the high sheriff would grant the application. Now, that is what we have no right to presume, and, unfortunately, our experience is totally the other way. We heard from one honourable Member that sometimes under the present state of things the court-houses were placed at the disposal of the people for political meetings. Among the friends of the high sheriff we know that is so; but when we ask for a court-house for the purpose of holding a Nationalist meeting, of course it is refused. There is not the slightest chance for us. I think the evidence in the case is absolutely overwhelming. The proposal is this: that inasmuch as the use of the court-houses is required once a year for three or four days for the purposes of the administration of justice, the high sheriff shall have the control of them for ever, and he gives 205 the county councils the right to use them for their own business when they want them. The very wording of this Amendment points to the fact that the county councils have no right to use these buildings except for the purpose of transacting their own business. Now I believe it would be perfectly easy to construct a clause that would entirely safeguard the administration of justice, whilst, at the same time, it would give the control and management of the court-house to the county council throughout the year, provided that when the sheriff made a requisition for a court he could have it for the administration of justice.
§ * MR. ATKINSON
The honourable Gentleman says that the court-houses are only required for the administration of justice once or twice a year, but they are always required once, and sometimes twice, a week, and certainly once a week or once a fortnight. What the honourable Member suggests is that the control of the court-house should be vested in a body which is under no obligation whatever to make any provision for the administration of justice?
§ * MR. ATKINSON
No obligation to make any provision for the administration of justice save to provide the money to build the fabric. To-morrow, if a judge came in and found the court-house shut up, he has no power to have it opened.
§ * MR. DILLON
What I say is that that should be the sheriff's duty, and he should be invested with power to do his duty.
§ * MR. ATKINSON
How is he to perform it if the county council does not choose to open the court-house for the judge? If the sheriff neglects to make provision for the judge he can be fined £100 or £500. It is a wrong principle to give the control of these buildings to any people save those who have regard to the main purposes for which they were built. The grand juries provided the money for the buildings, but they never had supreme control of them.
§ COLONEL SAUNDERSON (Armagh, N.)
I think that the object of this Bill, when it becomes law, is that unnecessary friction shall cease in Ireland. Now, I should be extremely glad if some words could be introduced into this Bill to prevent court-houses in Ireland from being used for any political purposes whatever. The honourable Member for East Mayo has pointed out that friction might arise if it were decided to hold a Nationalist meeting in the court-house. Another honourable Member said that the wording of this Amendment might exclude a concert being held for charitable purposes. It does not require much acumen to see that charitable concerts were not the purposes for which these court-houses were built. We know that all the county councils in the constituencies which return honourable Members on the opposite side of the House will vote for a Home Rule Bill, but it is a very different thing if these court-houses in the whole of Ireland—except, perhaps, in a few counties in the north—are turned into political meeting-places. I entirely object to that idea, and I think it is extremely wise to leave it to the high sheriff to decide as to who shall retain the use of the court-houses. So far as I know, the high sheriffs in Ireland I do not think there is one in the whole of Ireland who would refuse to grant the use of the court-house for the purposes of a charitable concert. That has never happened yet, nor do I think it ever will; but I do think the high sheriff would refuse most properly to allow the court-house to be used for a political meeting for the purpose of intimidating the neighbourhood. I hope that will always be the case. The grand jury has never had any authority whatever to allow the use of the court-house; that has always lain entirely in the hands of the high sheriff, and he is responsible for the court-houses in Ireland being at the disposal of the judge whenever they have been required for the purpose of the administration of justice. We know that it has been said over and over again in this House that the law is unpopular with the majority of the Irish people, and if it is so hateful without doubt we know what might arise. The court-house might be required for the purposes of the 207 commission of the peace, and we might conceive a county council sharing the views of the honourable Gentlemen opposite administering the law in all its forms, and modes; and how would the judge get on then? You would have the judge knocking at the door, and the high sheriff demanding admittance, and the county council inside refusing to open the door; and I should like to know by what legal means the high sheriff is going to obtain, an entry. I can only say, in conclusion, that if they agree with me, and if they see their way to do it, it would materially affect the good feeling of parties of all kinds if the Government, by means of some provision, prevented the courthouses in Ireland from being used for any political purposes whatever.
§ MR. J. REDMOND (Waterford)
It seems to me that everybody is agreed that the primary object of these buildings is to facilitate the administration of justice, and nobody would suggest for a moment that anything should prevent justice being properly administered. Now, what is suggested here is that the high sheriff should have complete control over the building whenever it is necessary for the administration of justice. The only thing in dispute is as to what is to be done with regard to the control and management of these buildings at other times, when they are not required for that purpose. The right honourable Gentleman has taken up the position that the person to whom the control and management at other times is to be given should be the high sheriff, whereas we are of opinion that the persons who should have that discretion should be the county council—the persons who have created these buildings, and who pay for their maintenance. Now, it seems to me that there ought to be no difficulty at all in carrying out this double purpose. We desire that the sheriff should have complete control of the buildings, whenever required, for the administration of justice, but when not so required we claim that that power should be vested in the county council. Now, there is a new clause which has been put forward by the honourable Member for Roscommon, 208 which would meet the case, and if the Government would come to an agreement with us as to the substance of our contention, there would be no difficulty in framing the necessary words. With regard to the observations of the honourable and gallant Gentleman opposite as to the use of these buildings for political purposes, I might say it is not the habit of the high sheriff to allow them to be used for political meetings, still less to allow them to be used for political meetings all on one side, but I have not in my mind the question of political meetings, but take the organisations with which the right honourable Gentleman the Member for South Dublin is connected; if he wishes to hold a meeting in connection with his co-operative society, why should that power be vested in the high sheriff and not in the county council? Our contention is a reasonable one, and I hope the Government will meet it.
§ MR. PLUNKETT
I have wished to hold meetings in court-houses in Ireland for economic purposes, and I have been refused on the ground that private meetings were the thin end of the wedge, and that if they were encouraged, God only knew what would happen next. I do not very much fear their being required to be used for political meetings, as we know on those occasions the people always assemble in their thousands, and I do not think there would be a court house in the country which would contain them. I do not think it is worth while putting in any special form of words to deal with a question of this kind. I think it would do more harm than good. I think if a proper provision were made for the use of these buildings for the administration of justice, it would be quite safe to leave them to the county council for the other portion of the time.
MR. T. M. HEALY
Usually an Amendment is introduced with a few remarks, especially if it is a long one; this is introduced by the Government without any remarks whatever. Hitherto, when we have pressed the Government for anything, or against anything, we have been always told that that particular thing was or was not in the English Act, that that was the great Charta to which 209 we had to look. If it was in the English Act it was all right It is like the fable story of the library at Alexandria; if the books there were like the Koran, then they should be burnt, because they were useless, but if the books there were not like the Koran, then they should be burnt, because they were mischievous. Now, the court-houses of England are dealt with not once but three times in the English Act, and what I wish to ask the Chief Secretary and the Government is whether they will stand or fall by the English Act in this matter. Section 3 is the first section dealing with this matter, and it says, not merely court-house, but—There shall be transferred to the council of each county on and after the appointed day the administrative business of the justices of the county in quarter sessions assembled—that is to say, all business done by the quarter sessions, or any committee appointed by the quarter sessions,and—shire halls, county halls, assize courts, judges' lodgings, lock-up houses, court-houses, justices' rooms, police-stations, and county buildings, works, and property subject as to the use of buildings by the quarter sessions, and the justices to the provisions of the Act respecting the joint committee of quarter sessions and the county council.Now, somebody in France said, in the time of Louis Napoleon, "give us liberty as in Austria," Austria being in rather a parlous condition as to liberty at that time, and I ask in this case, give us liberty as in the English Act, and I turn to clause 47, and I find—Notwithstanding anything in this Act, the courts of assize at Manchester"—Manchester, of course, being in the jurisdiction and a part of the county palatine of Lancaster—notwithstanding anything in this Act, the courts of assize at Manchester, with the lodgings of Her Majesty's judges, offices, lock-ups, and all other property vested in the justices of the peace of the county palatine of Lancaster by the Manchester Assize Courts Act, 1858, shall be vested in the county council of the said county palatine, and shall be under the control and management of a joint committee of members of the said county council, and of the council of every county borough locally situate in the hundred of Salford, and that joint committee shall have and exercise all such powers and rights (except the power of 210 levying, imposing, and assessing a rate for borrowing money) as are conferred on the said justices by the said Act.Then there is another section—section 64—and an additional section upon which, I regret to say, I cannot at this moment put my hand. The words of section 64 are—On and after the appointed day all property of the quarter sessions of a county, or held by the clerk of the peace, or any justice, or justices of a county, or treasurer, or commissioners, or otherwise, for any public uses and purposes of a county, or any division thereof, shall pass to and vest in and be held in trust for the council of the county, subject to all debts and liabilities affecting it, and shall be held by the county council for the same estate interest and purposes, and subject in the same covenants, conditions, and restrictions for, and subject to, which that property is, or would have been, held if this Act had not passed.And then there is that remarkable provision which the Government have put into the English Order of Council, instead of which you provide, that any differences shall be settled by the Lord Lieutenant. Now, we are all agreed that the administration should be the first consideration. There is no controversy about that. With reference to what the honourable Member for North Armagh has said—supposing, when that gentleman got his commission, he went down to the assizes in some district of Ireland and found that a contumacious county council had closed the doors of the court in his face—he would have a squadron of cavalry with him, and I would like to know what he would do under the circumstances? Why, he would merely give orders to take the county council and the county court; and he would have no other regard to the county council except for the purpose of sentencing them. It is admitted that the county council is there for the administration of justice; and does anyone believe that if a judge finds himself obstructed, backed as he is by the whole of the British nation, with its Army and Navy and Volunteers, and he holding Her Majesty's commission, a county council will be allowed to oust him out of his position? The idea is not to be thought of. It is grotesque. That being so, and it being conceded that the sheriff should have legal control for legal 211 purposes, why not leave us the control for our own purposes for the balance of the period? The honourable and gallant Member for North Armagh said he was in favour of having a provision, inserted in the clause that a court shall not be used for the purposes of any meeting; but, if this Bill passes, the sheriff's powers will not be cut down, they will remain exactly the same. I was very glad to hear the suggestion of the honourable Member for Belfast that court-houses should be used for their own purposes. I do not in the least degree object to a meeting of Orangemen in the court-house here, but I might object to the Orangemen of Cork having a meeting in the court-house there, because it would probably be adverse to public sentiment. But it is idle to pretend that we want these court-houses for the purpose of holding mere political gatherings. The land not being rich there are plenty of vacant fields for holding meetings upon. The reason why we want the control of the court-houses is that the people who maintain them think it is very hard that they cannot have them for the use of concerts, and so on. Under a series of English Acts, and by Resolutions passed in this House, the schools of England, where they are created and maintained out of the local rates, are placed under the control of the local boards for various purposes. Of course, we can take a school in Ireland, under the Ballot Act, for holding a Parliamentary election, but England can use her schools for concerts and also other purposes, but you refuse us the use of our schools for any purposes whatever; and we could not in any school in Ireland, throughout the length and breadth of the land, hold a bazaar or charity concert, or anything of the kind. The majority of the people are poor, and the last thing—the only thing—we can have is the court-house. Take every safeguard that the English Act gives you, but give the control to the county councils. Why are they not to have the control?
§ * MR LECKY (Dublin University)
It appears to me that it would not conduce to peace and harmony in Ireland if the court were used for the administra- 212 tion of justice in the morning and for meetings denouncing the administration, of justice in the evening. I have never yet heard that any sheriff has refused to allow the court-house to be used, for concerts and bazaars; but I agree with my honourable and gallant Friend who sits behind me that it would be much better not to allow any political leagues to use the courts which are intended for the administration of justice. The concerts and bazaars will no doubt go on in them as at present; but I should be very glad to see this Bill strengthened by the direct prohibition of meetings of a political character being held in them.
§ SIR T. ESMONDE
I do not agree with the honourable Gentleman that the court-houses should not be available for any meetings at all. The county councils have to build the courthouses and maintain them, and they are bound to raise their expenses by half-yearly instalments. They are obliged to employ an architect and pay him 50 guineas for the plans of the court-house. The grand juries have been obliged to pay rent for these court-houses; in other words, the grand juries, as the representatives of the ratepayers of Ireland, were given, practically, the control of these court-houses. They had to pay for them, and there is no reason to doubt that they had the control of them, because, under the Act, they had to appoint the persons employed in the court-houses, and pay the officers, and that was quite control enough. ["No, no!"] Honourable Gentlemen say "No, no!" but I go further—the high sheriff has the control of the court-house, and the high sheriff is, practically, the grand jury; he is appointed by the grand jury. ["No, no!"] Is not that so? Well, I am very sorry; the Irish administration is so complicated that perhaps it is not so. As a matter of fact, the grand jury send in the three names—the sheriff submits three names from the members of the grand jury, and they are sent to the judge, and he takes the first name and appoints that Gentleman to the position. ["No, no!"] Well, I am only talking of how the thing works out in practice; there may be some legal formalities, but, as a matter of fact, it 213 works out just as I say—the grand jury and the high sheriff are one and the same thing. The grand juries erect the court-houses and pay for them out of the money of the ratepayers, and I think it is only fair that the county councils, who are the natural successors of the grand juries, should have the control. If the county councils are going to take over the liabilities and labours of the grand juries, and are to have the administration of the money of the ratepayers, then they ought to have the control in this matter of the courthouses.
§ SIR W. FOSTER (Derby, Ilkeston)
I think we ought to make this Bill like the English Act; and if you trust a borough of England to look after a place for the judges, and see after their lodgings and take charge of the place in which the administration of justice takes place, then, I think, the same thing ought to be done in Ireland, and we ought to give the Irish people that control which they ought to have over the building when it is not wanted for the purpose of administering justice. On the other hand the Attorney General says we might have difficulties arising, because the county council might object to the use of the building for the administration of justice. If there is any truth in that contention, then it necessarily follows that you ought not to have county councils in Ireland at all. If you believe that the county councils are capable of interfering with the administration of justice, then there ought to be no county councils at all. But if you are to trust to these people to raise the money to build the court-house and keep it in proper repair for the administration of justice, surely they have a right to have control. If they erect the building and maintain it in proper repair they are entitled to have the use of and control over it at other times when it is not required for the purposes of administering justice. It appears to me if you do not trust the people all in all in this matter, you should not trust them at all.
§ MR. GERALD BALFOUR
It is impossible to follow the precedent of the English Bill to which reference has been made, because in England the courthouse is vested, not in the county council, but in a joint committee, and in Ireland a joint committee does not exist, and will not exist under this Bill.
MR. T. HEALY
You create a joint committee whenever you want one, and you could put it into the Bill.
§ MR. CLANCY
I think this Amendment is of such importance to us that I shall certainly divide the House upon it. I am surprised that upon a point which, so far as the Government is concerned, must be of very small importance, and to which we attach so much, that there should be any hesitation whatever in their conceding that point to us. I take the opposite view to that which is taken by honourable Gentlemen on the opposite side. They would abolish all political meetings from the court-houses. I confess, for my part, the question of political meetings was not in my mind at all when I moved the Amendment, because I really believe that if anybody wanted to hold an effective meeting he would certainly hold it outside, and state that it would be far better far the administration to have the courthouse free, and to have the monster meeting outside. It is a very antiquated idea to think that you cannot get peace and harmony in Ireland without shutting up the people's mouths. The proper idea to act upon is that everybody should say what he likes, and for my part I would not have any hesitation in allowing any Irish meeting to take place in a courts house; but obviously the desire is to prevent these political meetings, and that is the only thing that stands in the way of these concessions being made by the Government. I think that that must be a second thought, because I notice in the draft Order in Council, sub-section 7 says that the county council shall have power to manage any land or buildings whatever, by virtue of this Act, or otherwise vested in the council. It is a fair Amendment which I wish to introduce; and if this Amendment is resisted I would 215 ask the right honourable Gentleman what would be the value of this Order in Council—it would simply be ultra vires—therefore I say again it is a second thought on the part of the Government. They have taken fright at the idea of a political meeting being held in a courthouse, and they change their proposal in order to avoid its taking place. Such childish fears never haunted the imagination of any British Minister. The right honourable Gentleman said Ins only idea was the desire to preserve to the county council the powers possessed by the grand juries. Now, it is perfectly true that every grand jury but one have not the control and management of the court-houses. That control was vested in the sheriff, but there was one grand jury—that for the County of Dublin, which I represent—which has that control, and if this Amendment now before the Committee is rejected, I shall undoubtedly bring another Amendment before the Committee that this clause shall not apply to the County of Dublin. Section 131 of the Grand Juries Act empowers the grand jury to appoint a committee to superintend and have charge of the court-house belonging to the county; and if this Amendment is rejected I shall certainly bring in that Amendment, in order that Dublin should still retain the control of the court-house. I think this proceeding on the part of the Government is most characteristic. There is not a Bill, not a land Bill, introduced but some miserable restriction has been incorporated in it. There is not a Bill passed in which you do not keep something behind, and then a few years afterwards you bring in an amending Act, and do that which you refuse to do in the first instance. Here is a thing in this Bill which will have to be rectified, and in a few years hence it will be seen that the county council do not interfere with the administration of justice, and that the people have some common-sense, and that the people do not make fools and asses of themselves; and you will be bringing in a Bill in a few years to do that which you will not do at our request. I regard this Amendment as a matter of great importance, which is considered of very small importance by the Government, and if it is not conceded by them I shall certainly divide the House upon it.
§ * SIR JOHN COLOMB (Great Yarmouth)
I venture to think that we have now come to a clause and to a point where a little consideration might be desirable. I agree with my honourable and gallant Friend behind me that it would be very much better if a clause were inserted by which political meetings of any kind were prohibited. On the other hand, I think I ought to say that in Ireland there are really no buildings where entertainments quite apart from politics could be held except the court-houses, and I do not altogether agree with what has been said by honourable Friends behind me, that no high sheriff would ever refuse to grant the use of the court-house for the purposes of entertainments; I don't agree with that for one reason, that I have refused to grant them myself, and I have done it on the ground that unless the parties who give the entertainments were prepared to insure the court-houses I would not permit it to be used, because I was not prepared to run the risk of having a fire and having to build up the court-house again. I would ask my right honourable Friend that a clause might be drafted which might provide that, while the sheriff on the one hand should have thorough and paramount right to the court-house for the purpose of the administration of justice, the county council, on the other, should have the use of the court-house for their own administrative business; and then I think it would be desirable that some arrangement should be made by which, through the joint act of the sheriff and the chairman of the county council, where they agree that the court-house should be allowed to be used for the purposes of entertainment, they should have power to allow them to be used for that purpose. Therefore, on the whole—and I am one of those who very strongly desire that in the working of the county council harmonious relations should exist—I would suggest to my right honourable Friend whether it would not be possible to postpone this question for the moment, and to consider my suggestion between this and the Report stage.
§ MR. MURNAGHAN (Tyrone, Mid)
As the clause strikes at the principle of popular control, I think we ought to 217 offer it our most strenuous opposition. The effect of this is to take away from the bodies responsible for the upkeep of the buildings the power to control them, and it goes directly opposite to the principles of the Bill. We have been told that the county councils of the future will have the same power over these buildings as was vested in the grand juries of the past. The grand juries of the past had no more control over these buildings than that which the county councils will have in the future; but I do venture to tell the Committee that the grand juries in the past always had their wishes carried out by the high sheriff. When the grand jury presented an application to the high sheriff he never failed to grant it; that being the case, will he in the future give the county council the same consideration which he gave to the grand juries in the past. I do not think so, and therefore I say this Amendment proposed by the Government is one which every person who believes in popular administration, who believes in giving the people a voice in the management of their affairs, must oppose, find we on this side of the House shall oppose to the utmost in our power.
MR. T. HEALY
The right honourable Gentleman the Chief Secretary made a great point of the fact that he could not give us the English Act because in this country the union is managed by a joint committee. Possibly the right honourable Gentleman is correct, but his Bill makes a ridiculous distinction between itself and the English Act. Section 64 of the English Act deals with the property which shall be vested in the county council. Here the property is dealt with in an Order in Council, section 14. Now, section 14 of the Order in Council is practically in the words of the 64th section of the English Act, but nowhere in the Bill does the right honourable Gentleman mention court-houses, which is specifically done in the English Act. Now, in Lancaster, whilst it is managed by a joint committee—I do not pretend to be acquainted with the law of Lancaster—while there is a joint committee there, it is not a joint committee of quarter sessions at all. These are the words of the Act, section 47—The courts of assize at Manchester, with the lodgings for Her Majesty's judges, offices, 218 lockups, and all other property rested in the justices of the peace of the county palatine of Lancaster, by the Manchester Assize Act of 1858, shall be vested in the county council of the said county palatine, shall be under the control and management of a joint committee of members of the said county council, and of the council of every county borough locally situate in the Hundred of Salford.Now, that joint committee is entirely different from the one suggested by the right honourable Gentleman, that it was a joint committee of the quarter sessions and the county council. It is nothing of the sort. Section 3 provides that—Shire halls, county halls, assize courts, judges' lodgings, lockup houses, court-houses, justices' rooms, police-stations, and county buildings, works, and property, subject as to the use of buildings by the quarter sessions and the justices to the provisions of this Act respecting the joint committee of quarter sessions and the county council, shall be transferred to, and shall vest in, the county council.Then, turning to section 30, we find—For the purposes of the police and the clerk of the peace, and of the clerk of the justices and joint officers, and of matters required to be determined jointly by the quarter sessions and the council of a county, there shall a joint committee of the quarter sessions and the county council.Now observe that, while in England the county councils have an absolute vesting in them of the buildings and the fee simple of these institutions, there is no such vesting in the Irish county councils. Now, I say that it is a very curious thing. In England they deal with this matter differently; they vest all these things in the county councils, and there is this general section, clause 64, vesting everything in the county council. The reason why they specifically mentioned courthouses was because of section 30, which says—Any matters arising under this Act with respect to the police, or to the clerk of the peace, or to the clerks of the justices, or to officers who serve both the quarter sessions of justices and the county council, or to the provision of accommodation for the quarter sessions, or justices out of session, or to the use by them or the police or the said clerks of any building, rooms, or premises,etc., etc.—And any other matter requiring to be determined jointly by the quarter sessions and the county council shall be referred to and determined by the joint committee.219 Observe the enormous distinction. All that the joint committee can do in England is to provide for their own user, for the purposes of the administration of justice, whereas it is suggested by the right honourable Gentleman the Chief Secretary that in Ireland there is a joint vesting and a joint control for all purposes. I deny that, and when he gets up with such disdain to attack the right honourable Baronet upon his ignorance of the law he must be taken to know the law of England, and if he did he deliberately misled the Committee. I say that when he got up and twitted the honourable Gentleman the Member for Derbyshire and the right honourable Gentleman upon their ignorance of the Irish and English law, and when, with a great show of learning, he said that in England the control was vested in a joint committee, he had not the slightest foundation for that statement, not a shadow, not a tittle of foundation. The only thing the joint committee can do is this: the buildings being vested absolutely in the county council the joint committee can provide for the user of them for the purpose of the administration of justice. Yet the right honourable Gentleman thinks it becomes one in his position when he has taken up the position he has. He told the honourable Member for Wiltshire that when he came to the end of this Bill he know his business better than anybody else. He has a great mastery over the Bill, but the greater the mastery the greater the necessity for accuracy, especially in this case, and it is, therefore, that I say it is untrue to state that in England—["Order, order!"] I do say so—I say it is untrue to state that in England there is a joint vesting with a joint committee. I challenge contradiction upon the point. All the joint committee can do is to provide for the user of the county property, and in Lancaster there is no joint committee of quarter sessions, but only of the county borough and the county council, and upon this we are to be treated differently from the English Act.
§ DR. RENTOUL (Down, E.)
I think this Debate has gone on long enough, and if the honourable Member for Down goes to a Division upon it I shall vote 220 with him; but I think it is a very small matter indeed whether these buildings are in the hands of the county council or in the hands of the sheriff. With regard to the observations made about concerts and so forth, I think it would be better not to allow them to be used for concerts at all. I do not think it adds to the dignity of the buildings to use them for such purposes. With regard to political meetings, it takes a long time to find out what a political meeting is. Suppose a meeting were called to discuss, the financial relations with England, would that be a political meeting or not? Under the circumstances it seems to me that, as we have to finish this Bill in a very short time, we are wasting a great deal of valuable time upon a very trifling and unimportant matter. I should be glad if the right honourable Gentleman the Chief Secretary could see his way to agree with this Amendment, because if the county councils are not to be trusted in this small and unimportant matter, then I fail to see how you are going to trust them at all. At the same time, I am totally unable to understand the importance which this matter has for Gentlemen opposite. I should like to see a clause introduced by which these buildings should be left in the hands of the county councils to keep them up and use them for their meetings, and at the same time they should be used for no other kind of meeting whatsoever. One of the last things the people of London would desire to see would be concerts held at Spring Gardens, or at the Old Bailey, where justice is administered. I think we ought to use these buildings in Ireland for the administration of the law, and make the county councils the custodians of them. If we are to go to a Division, I would suggest that we ought to go to a Division at once, because there are yet a great many weighty and important Measures to deal with.
§ MR. P. A. McHUGH (Leitrim, N.)
The honourable Gentleman who has just sat down considers this matter of very little importance. I consider it is a matter of the greatest importance, because there is underlying it the principle for which we are fighting—namely, that those who pay for the public buildings in Ireland shall have the control and the use of them for any purposes when they 221 are not required for the purposes of the administration of justice. The honourable Gentleman said in his opinion it would be undignified to see the courthouses in Ireland used for the purposes of concerts or public meetings. I say in many towns in Ireland it is impossible to get a concert hall at all except you go to the court-house, and I say the people who engage to pay for the keep of the court, who build the court, and pay for its maintenance, should have the control of it, and should be entitled to use it for any purposes that they think fit—either concerts or bazaars, and public meetings, political or otherwise. So far as I can understand, the proposal the Chief Secretary makes is this: that the same principle which already prevails in Ireland shall continue—namely, that a person called the High Sheriff—any responsible person, a man who may not pay a shilling of the rates—will have complete control of buildings in Ireland, erected at the expense of the ratepayers of the country. It very frequently happens that a man is made a High Sheriff in Ireland for a county for which he has never stood. I recollect a case where it was proposed to elect in Leitrim a man unknown in the county, and it was only when I drew attention to the fact that he was not known that his election was dropped. What is the High Sheriff of Ireland? A man who is elected by the grand jury. [Cries of "No, no!"] He is, I say so again—he is a man who is nominated by the grand jury, and a man who is so nominated is invariably elected. ["No, no!"] It is so. I speak with a knowledge of what takes place in Ireland. I am a member of the Grand Jury of Sligo, and have been for the last 25 years, and I say the sheriff is selected invariably by the grand jury. ["No, no!"] Yes, they are; and the sheriff selects the grand jurors. The thing goes the round like that. The honourable and gallant Gentleman opposite laughs at my statement. He himself is, as I understand, a foreman of a grand jury, and I do not believe there could be a better foreman of a grand jury than the honourable and gallant Member; but, Mr. Lowther, I ask him, with all his knowledge of the working of the grand juries in Ireland, is it not a fact that the 222 nomination for the position of High Sheriff is in the grand jury, and the nomination of the grand jury is invariably acted upon by the Lord Lieutenant?
§ MR. P. A. M'HUGH
I am absolutely astonished that the honourable and gallant Gentleman should stand up in his place and make such a statement as that—a statement which, in my judgment, is calculated to lead us to the belief that he does not know what is the procedure of the grand jury in the election, of the High Sheriff of Ireland. The grand jury select three names. [Cries of "No, no!"] They do. They send up three names to the Judge of Assize. ["No, no!"] Yes, they do, and the first man, the first name upon the list, is invariably selected as High Sheriff. ["No, no!"] That is the procedure, Mr. Lowther, and that man may have no interest in the county. He may be a man who is unable to get a carriage and pair to take the judge from the railway station to the place at which he is going to lodge during the assizes, and we have had instances in Leitrim where the men nominated by the grand jury were of such standing that they could not pay for the carriage and pair, and they had to be allowed to decline to act. But, apart altogether from that, there is underlying all the great principle of this Amendment, and I say the people who build these court-houses, and maintain them at their own expense, have a right to predominate, so far as regards the management of those buildings. Let me take a concrete case—the court-house in the town and city of Sligo. The proposal of the Chief Secretary is that the control of the building should vest in the High Sheriff. Who is the High Sheriff? Is he responsible for this court-house; is he responsible to the people? Does he pay rates? What right has he to have the control of a building which cost the town and county of Sligo £17,000? I say it is absurd. It is worse than absurd. It is an insult to the people of the county and town of Sligo, for this reason: that, although we pay 90 per 223 cent. of the rates—[Uproar.] I must say, Mr. Lowther, that this disorderly interruption is not calculated to hasten these proceedings or this discussion. So far as I am concerned, I am speaking for my constituents in Ireland, and I am not going to be put down by clamour and disorderly interruptions of this character. I say it is a monstrous proceeding, and I shall stop until this interruption ceases. It is a monstrous thing for the Chief Secretary of Ireland, who went over to kill Home Rule with kindness, to bring forward this Measure, and to tell us that the town-hall, built by the town and county of Sligo, at an expense of £17,000, is not to be under the control of the people of Sligo, who pay 90 per cent, of the rates, but is to be put under the control of a man who is not in any way responsible to the ratepayers. So far as I personally am concerned, I. will decline to believe that the right honourable Gentleman opposite will attempt to persevere with it.
SIR R. PENROSE FITZGERALD
It Is as well that this House should not be led away by any erroneous idea as to the appointment of sheriffs. I have for many years been a member of a grand jury. I have never been made sheriff, and I have never had my opinion asked about the pricking for the name of the High Sheriff, and for the last 36 years I do not think the question of the appointment has ever been put before the grand jury.
§ MR. T. D. SULLIVAN (Donegal, W.)
Would somebody throw a little light upon this very great mystery? How is the High Sheriff elected? We are all in a fog upon this matter. Is there anyone who can enlighten us?
§ * SIR J. COLOMB
The process is this: the court of assize has three names submitted to them by the outgoing sheriff.
§ * SIR J. COLOMB
No, no! On the personal responsibility of the outgoing High Sheriff the judge can take any name he chooses, or he can tell the High Sheriff to take the list away, and give him some fresh ones. The names go out, and upon those names the Lord Lieutenant says who the sheriff is to be.
§ The Committee divided on Mr. CLANCY'S Amendment to Mr. GERALD BALFOUR'S Amendment:—Ayes 102; Noes 175.—(Division List No. 113.)227
|Abraham, Wm. (Cork, N.E.)||Crean, Eugene||Healy, Maurice (Cork)|
|Allen, Wm. (Newc.-under-L.)||Crilly, Daniel||Healy, T. M. (Louth, N.)|
|Allison, Robert Andrew||Daly, James||Hemphill, Rt. Hon. C. H.|
|Austin, Sir John (Yorkshire)||Dillon, John||Holden, Sir Angus|
|Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)||Donelan, Captain A.||Horniman, Frederick John|
|Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)||Doogan, P. C.||Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.|
|Billson, Alfred||Doughty, George||Joicey, Sir James|
|Bolton, Thomas Dolling||Duckworth, James||Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)|
|Brigg, John||Ellis, T. E. (Merionethshire)||Jordan, Jeremiah|
|Burt, Thomas||Fenwick, Charles||Kearley, Hudson E.|
|Caldwell, James||Field, William (Dublin)||Kilbride, Denis|
|Carew, James Laurence||Flynn, James Christopher||Knox, Edmund F. Vesey|
|Carvill, Patrick G. Hamilton||Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)||Lawson, Sir W. (Cumberland)|
|Channing, Francis Allston||Goddard, Daniel Ford||Lough, Thomas|
|Clough, Walter Owen||Haldane, Richard Burdon||Macaleese, Daniel|
|Collery, Bernard||Hammond, John (Carlow)||McDonnell, Dr. M. A. (Qn.'sCo.)|
|Colville, John||Hayden, John Patrick||MacNeill, John G. Swift|
|Commins, Andrew||Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-||McCartan, Michael|
|Condon, Thomas Joseph||Hazell, Walter||McDermott, Patrick|
|McEwan, William||Power, Patrick Joseph||Smith, Samuel (Flint)|
|M'Ghee, Richard||Price, Robert John||Soames, Arthur Wellesley|
|M'Hugh, E. (Armagh. S.)||Provand, Andrew Dryburgh||Spicer, Albert|
|M'Hugh, Patrick A. (Leitrim)||Reckitt, Harold James||Steadman, William Charles|
|Maden, John Henry||Redmond, J. E. (Waterford)||Stevenson, Francis S.|
|Mandeville, .J. Francis||Rentoul, James Alexander||Strachey, Edward|
|Molloy, Bernard Charles||Rickett, J. Compton||Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)|
|Morgan, J. L. (Carmarthen)||Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)||Sullivan, T. D. (Donegal, W.)|
|Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)||Robson, William Snowdon||Thomas, A. (Carmarthen, E.)|
|Murnaghan, George||Roche, Hon. J. (Kerry, E.)||Tully, Jasper|
|Norton, Capt. Cecil William||Roche, John (Galway, E.)||Wedderburn, Sir William|
|Nussey, Thomas Willans||Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees)||Williams, J. Carvell (Notts)|
|O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)||Schwann, Charles E.||Wilson, Fred. W. (Norfolk)|
|O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary)||Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)||TELLERS FOR THE AYES—|
|O'Keeffe, Francis Arthur||Shee, James John||Mr. Clancy and Sir Thomas|
|Plunkett, Rt. Hon. H. C.||Sheehy, David||Esmonde.|
|Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir A. F.||Fisher, William Hayes||Lawrence, Sir E. (Cornwall)|
|Allhusen, Augustus H. E.||Fison, Frederick William||Lawrence, W. F. (Liverpool)|
|Arnold, Alfred||FitzGerald, Sir R. Penrose-||Lawson, John G. (Yorks.)|
|Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John||Fletcher, Sir Henry||Lea, Sir T. (Londonderry)|
|Bagot, Capt. J. FitzRoy||Folkestone, Viscount||Lecky, Rt. Hon. W. E. H.|
|Bailey, James (Walworth)||Forwood, Rt. Hon. Sir A. B.||Legh, Hon. T. W. (Lancs.)|
|Balcarres, Lord||Foster, Colonel (Lancaster)||Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie|
|Balfour, Rt.Hn. G. W. (Leeds)||Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)||Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.|
|Banbury, Frederick George||Fry, Lewis||Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)|
|Barry, RtHnAHSmith-(Hunts)||Galloway, William Johnson||Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverp'l)|
|Barton, Dunbar Plunket||Garfit, William||Lopes, Henry Yarde Buller|
|Beach,Rt.Hn. Sir M. H. (Brist'l)||Gedge, Sydney||Lorne, Marquess of|
|Beckett, Ernest William||Gibbons, J. Lloyd||Lowe, Francis William|
|Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe||Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)||Lucas-Shadwell, William|
|Bentinck, Lord Henry C.||Gilliat, John Saunders||Maclure, Sir John William|
|Bethell, Commander||Goldsworthy, Major-General||McArthur, Chas. (Liverpool)|
|Bigwood, James||Gordon, Hon. John Edward||McCalmont, H. L. B. (Cambs.)|
|Brassey, Albert||Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.||McCalmont,Mj-Gn. (Ant'm, N.)|
|Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John||Goschen,Rt. Hn. G. J. (St. Geo's)||McKillop, James|
|Brookfield, A. Montagu||Goschen, George J. (Sussex)||Malcolm, Ian|
|Bullard, Sir Harry||Goulding, Edward Alfred||Martin, Richard Biddulph|
|Butcher, John George||Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)||Mildmay, Francis Bingham|
|Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)||Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)||Milward, Colonel Victor|
|Carlile, William Walter||Gretton, John||Monckton, Edward Philip|
|Cavendish, V. C.W.(Derbysh.)||Greville, Captain||Monk, Charles James|
|Chaloner, Capt. R. G. W.||Gull, Sir Cameron||Montagu, Hon. J. S. (Hants)|
|Chamberlain,Rt.Hn.J. (Birm.)||Hamilton, Rt. Hon. Lord G.||Moon, Edward Robert Pacy|
|Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)||Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. W.||More, Robert Jasper|
|Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry||Hanson, Sir Reginald||Morgan, Hn. F. (Monm'thsh.)|
|Chelsea, Viscount||Haslett, Sir James Horner||Morrell, George Herbert|
|Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.||Hatch, Ernest Frederick G.||Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)|
|Coghill, Douglas Harry||Heath, James||Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)|
|Cohen, Benjamin Louis||Helder, Augustus||Myers, William Henry|
|Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse||Henderson, Alexander||Newdigate, Francis Alex.|
|Colomb, Sir John Charles R.||Hill, Rt. Hn. Lord A. (Down)||Nicol, Donald Ninian|
|Compton, Lord Alwyne||Hill, Sir Edward S. (Bristol)||Northcote, Hon. Sir H. S.|
|Corbett, A. C. (Glasgow)||Hobhouse, Henry||O'Neill, Hon. Robert T.|
|Cox, Robert||Holland, Hon. Lionel R.||Parkes, Ebenezer|
|Cross, Herb. S. (Bolton)||Hornby, William Henry||Phillpotts, Capt. Arthur|
|Cubitt, Hon. Henry||Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn||Platt-Higgins, Frederick|
|Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)||Hudson, George Bickersteth||Purvis, Robert|
|Dickson-Poynder, Sir J. P.||Hutton, John (Yorks, N.R.)||Rasch, Major Frederic Carne|
|Dorington, Sir John Edward||Jebb, Richard Claverhouse||Richards, Henry Charles|
|Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-||Johnston, William (Belfast)||Richardson, Sir T. (Hartlep'l)|
|Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.||Johnstone, John H. (Sussex)||Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.|
|Fardell, Sir T. George||Jolliffe, Hon. H. George||Ritchie, Rt. Hon. Chas. T.|
|Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn E.||Kenrick, William||Robinson, Brooke|
|Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)||Kenyon-Slaney, Col. William||Russell, Gen. F. S. (Chelt'm.)|
|Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne||Kimber, Henry||Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)|
|Firbank, Joseph Thomas||Lafone, Alfred||Saunderson, Col. Edw. James|
|Savory, Sir Joseph||Tomlinson, W. E. Murray||Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm|
|Sharpe, William Edward T.||Tritton, Charles Ernest||Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart-|
|Simeon, Sir Barrington||Waring, Col. Thomas||Wylie, Alexander|
|Sinclair, Louis (Romford)||Webster, R. G. (St. Pancras)||Young, Com. (Berks., E.)|
|Smith, A. H. (Christchurch)||Webster, Sir R. E. (I. of W.)||Younger, William|
|Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)||Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon-|
|Stanley, E. J. (Somerset)||Whitmore, Charles Algernon||TELLERS FOR THE NOES—|
|Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley||Williams, J. Powell (Birm.)||Sir William Walrond and|
|Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)||Willoughby de Eresby, Lord||Mr. Anstruther.|
|Thornton, Percy M.||Wodehouse, E. R. (Bath)|
Question put, and agreed to.
§ Original Amendment agreed to.
§ MR. CLANCY
I wish to ask the right honourable Gentleman the Attorney General whether he has considered the position of Dublin. I have referred him to the statutes by which Dublin was granted certain rights. I trust the right honourable Gentleman will accept the Amendment I have put down upon this point.
§ * MR. ATKINSON
We shall be prepared to consider that later. The provision in this clause leaves the city of Dublin as at present.
§ Clause 46, as amended, added to the Bill.
§ Clause 47 added to the Bill.