§ Moved, "That the Order of the Day for the Third Reading of this Bill be discharged."—(The Lord Redesdale.)
§ LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYobjected to the Bill being dropped. It was generally agreed to be a very useful measure; and although objections had been raised by the right rev. Bench to the Bill as first introduced, the required alterations had been made in the present Bill.
§ LORD REDESDALEregretted to be compelled to withdraw the Bill, but on such a subject he held that it was desirable there should be a general concurrence of opinion. As that could not be secured, he deemed it best, under all the circumstances of the case, to withdraw the Bill.
§ LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYsaid, that no reason having been given for the withdrawal of the Bill, he should feel it his duty to divide the House against the Motion.
§ On Question? their Lordships divided: —Contents 28; Not-Contents 19: Majority 9.
| CONTENTS. | |
| Canterbury, Arcbp. | Leven and Melville, E. |
| Malmesbury, E. | |
| Chelmsford,L.(L. Chancellor.) | Powis, E. |
| Shrewsbury, E. | |
| Buckingham and Chandos, D. | Hawarden, V. |
| Limerick, &c., Bp. | |
| Belmore, E. | London, Bp. |
| Carnarvon, E. | Manchester, Bp. |
| Chichester, E. | |
| Dartmouth, E. | Churchill, L. |
| Derby, E. | Colville of Culross, L. |
| Devon, E. | Congleton, L. |
| Doncaster, E. (D. Buccleuch and Queensberry.) | Raglan, L. |
| Redesdale, L. [Teller.] | |
| Silchester, L. (E. Longford.) [Teller.] | |
| Graham, E. (D. Montrose.) | Sondes, L. |
| Harrowby, E. | Southampton, L. |
| NOT-CONTENTS. | |
| Normanby, M. | Ebury, L. |
| Foley, L. | |
| Amherst, E. | Hunsdon, L. (V. Falkland.) |
| Clarendon, E. | |
| Kimberley, E. [Teller.] | Lyveden, L. |
| Lucan, E. | Minster, L. (M. Conyngham.) |
| Romney, E. | |
| Russell, E. | Mostyn, L. |
| Ponsonby, L. (E. Bessborough.) | |
| De Vesci, V. | Romilly, L. |
| Clermont, L. | Stanley of Alderley, L. [Teller.] |
| Cranworth, L. |
§ Resolved in the Affirmative; Order of the Day for the Third Reading discharged accordingly.