§ Lords Amendment to omit subsection (1) of Clause 5 considered.
§ MR. MOONEY (Newry)objected to the omission of the subsection which, he contended did not interfere with the general scope of the Bill, and he did not know why it should be left out.
§ THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. CHERRY,) Liverpool, Exchangesaid that this subsection had originally been inserted with the object of exempting bottle-nosed whales from the provisions of this measure. It had, however, been pointed out that the bottle-nosed whale was a Royal fish, and that the insertion of the subsection would interfere with the Royal prerogative in a substantial degree. For that reason the subsection had been omitted. He could not tell what distinguished bottle-nosed whales from any other kind.