HC Deb 28 March 1906 vol 154 c1389

Order for Second Reading read.

MR. LUKE WHITE (Yorkshire, E.R., Buckrbse),

in moving the Second Reading of this Bill said the object of it was to provide that it should not be necessary hereafter for either the coroner or the jury to view a body unless the coroner or a majority of the jury should deem a view necessary. That was a reform in Coroner's Court law which had long been required by the country. He thought it was the general opinion that the Bill should be passed this session.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."

Debate arising,

LORD R. CECIL (Marylebone, E.)

said this might be a very good Bill, but the hon. Member, in moving it, had given no reason for passing it. In the absence of any reason why it should be passed he was bound to oppose such a proposal. He begged to move the adjournment of the debate.

SIR WILLIAM BULL (Hammersmith)

seconded the Motion for adjourning the debate.

Motion made and Question, "That the debate be now adjourned"—(Lord Robert Cecil)— put, and negatived.

Original Question again proposed.

MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORD (Liverpool, West Derby)

said that he opposed this Bill. It was very evident that if an inquest was necessary at all somebody must view the body.

And it being midnight, the debate stood adjourned.