HC Deb 21 July 1911 vol 28 cc1430-1

Order for Second Reading read.

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

Sir F. BANBURY

There are in the Bill several Acts which are only partially renewed, notably one in connection with the Evicted Tenants Act, 1907. There are no Unionist Members from Ireland present. I would ask whether the Government will give an undertaking that the Committee stage of the Bill will be taken at a reasonable time, before eleven o'clock, so that if there are any Committee points which require discussion we may have an opportunity of discussing them.

Mr. GULLAND

The hon. Baronet says that the points he is interested in are Committee points. I am quite sure that the Prime Minister will be very glad to arrange that the Committee stage should be taken at a reasonable hour, and that there will be an opportunity for discussing those points.

Mr. BOOTH

This is one of the Bills which I certainly dislike intensely. Not only are we in this House asked to pass five or six Bills a day, but we are also asked to renew, by the Bill now before the House, a number of Acts which are obsolete, and which are a disgrace to the Statute Book. There are one or two of them that have led to more cruelty to individuals than anything else in our legislation. If there is an understanding that points relating to the Acts mentioned in the Schedule of the Bill may be raised in the Committee stage, I think I may leave the matter now. I will only indicate one of the Statutes to which I object. It is the Sunday Observation Prosecution Act of 1871. When one reads the title of that statute in cold type, one wonders whether it is a tribute to the feelings of the Sabbatarian. Hon. Members are aware that a poor fellow carrying on the business of barber at High Wycombe has been convicted hundreds of times under a Sunday observance statute, and that now he has become bankrupt. He was simply trying to oblige the people among whom he lives. There are other Acts among the expiring laws which involve a great infringement of personal liberty. The hon. Baronet opposite said he would defer the points he desires to raise on this Bill on the understanding that sufficient time will be allowed in Committee. If the hon. Member (Mr. Gulland) will give me an assurance that no proposal involving injustice as regards personal liberty in this country shall be entered upon unless reasonable time is allowed for discussion, I can see my way to wait until the Committee stage.

Sir F. BAN BURY

Perhaps I may point out to the hon. Member that what I asked was that not only should the Committee stage be taken at a reasonable time, but that a reasonable amount of time should be given for discussion. I am sure no one desires to prevent the hon. Member from raising points in which he is interested.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a second time, and committed to Committee of the Whole House for Monday next.—[Mr. Gulland.]