HC Deb 28 July 1903 vol 126 cc527-8
MR. DISRAELI (Cheshire, Altrincham)

asked why the preamble of the Bill had been omitted.

MR. CALDWELL (Lanarkshire, Mid)

This question is only put for purposes of annoyance, and if other hon. Members ad opted the same course it would bring Private Bill Business to a deadlock. It is not my duty to explain the details of the Bill. If the hon. Gentleman opposes the Bill, it will have to be taken at an Evening Sitting, and the necessary explanation can then be got from the promoters.


on a point of order, took exception to the statement that Ids object was to annoy the hon. Member. His object had been to obtain information for the House.


The hon. Member ought not to impute motives, but at the same time he is quite right in saying that it is not his duty to explain the merits of or advocate Bills. It is greatly for the convenience of the House that there should be some one familiar with its practice to carry on in proper form the Private Business.


The hon. Gentleman told me last night that he would block every Private Bill to-day, and I think I was justified from that statement in making the observation I did.

Lords' Amendments agreed to.