§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—(Sir A. Acland-Hood.)
§ MR. DALZIEL (Kirkcaldy Burghs)
said that in reference to the Scotch Churches Bill, greatly to their surprise, the Bill had been allowed to be interfered with by the Aliens Bill, and he wished to impress upon the Lord-Advocate the extreme urgency of this Bill. He wished to know whether the Government could give them any assurance as to when the debate on the Second Reading of the Scotch Churches Bill would be resumed. The next few days appeared to be already allocated, and it seemed a great pity that an important measure like the Scotch Bill should nave to give place to the Aliens Bill, which was not at all so pressing. He hoped the Lord-Advocate would be able to assure them that this interruption would not be likely to endanger the passage of the measure.
THE LORD-ADVOCATE (Mr. SCOTT DICKSON, Glsgow, Bridgton)
said the Government were most anxious that the Scottish Churches Bill should be finished that night, and it was no fault of theirs that it was not finished, but that the evening sitting had, as he thought, been wasted. They were anxious to resume the consideration on the earliest possible date that the state of public business would allow.
§ MR. CALDWELL (Lanarkshire, Mid.)
asserted that the delay surrounding the progress being made with the Scottish Churches Bill was due to the unwillingness of the Government, in the first instance, to introduce the Bill until the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland had met and given the Government the one to insert Clause 5.
§ MR. SWIFT MACNEILL (Donegal, S.)
said he could not allow the statement to go unchallenged that the Motion which they had been discussing that evening had been a waste of time. He reminded the Lord-Advocate that if the Speaker had not thought that it dealt with a matter of urgent public importance he would not have allowed the Motion for the adjournment to have been taken. It was a reflection upon the Chair to say that the time had been wasted, and what did the Lord-Advocate mean by it? He would not allow any Irish discussion in this House to be characterised by a petty Treasury official as a waste of time, and the Lord-Advocate had better alter his Parliamentary manners as quickly as he could. He noticed that the Patronage Secretary to the Treasury had put down for to-day the Third Reading of the Consolidated Fund Bill No. 2. Upon this measure he had given formal notice to move its rejection in order to bring before that House a matter of imperative public interest dealing with military law.
§ Notice taken that forty Members were not present; House counted, and forty Members not being present:—
§ Adjourned at nineteen minutes before One o'clock.