COMMONS' AMENDMENTS. (Hansard, 8 August 1870)

§ LORD CAIRNS
expressed his surprise at the course that had been taken with regard to this measure. When the Bill was first introduced considerable objection was taken to it by several noble Lords. Some objected to the repeal of the Ecclesiastical Titles Act altogether; others, like a noble Earl (Earl Russell), did not object to the repeal, but objected to the wording of the Bill. For his own part, recognizing, as he did, that the Government were under an obligation to propose some measure of this kind, he was anxious to make it acceptable to both sides of the House. He accordingly proposed certain Amendments, with which he understood the Government were satisfied, and the consequence was that a great number of Boers had left town under the impression that the Bill was beyond the risk of alteration. In the other House of Parliament he was aware that the same thing had taken place. But the Home Secretary had taken an objection to the Bill as altered, in which he must have been misreported; for he could not conceive that the right hon. Gentleman could fall into such a mistake as he was represented to have made. He did not promise to go into the general question at a time when so many of their Lordships who had taken part in the former discussions were absent; and he thought the only course now was to withdraw the Bill till next Session.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR
said, he believed there was a considerable difference of opinion as to the words, even among those who were mainly affected by them. It was believed, when 1684 the Bill was originally brought in, that it would give general satisfaction; but he was aware that there were several of those affected who preferred the words of his noble and learned Friend (Lord Cairns). There had been some misapprehension on the subject in the other House. He regretted this, as the Government were under a promise to introduce a Bill on this subject in the present year. He did not say that the Bill of his noble Friend (the Earl of Kimberley) was free from all objections; but he could say confidently that it was free from some objections to which the words of his noble and learned Friend were exposed. It was of course impossible to satisfy all parties.

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY
said, that under these circumstances Her Majesty's Government would not ask their Lordships to agree to the Commons' Amendments, but would withdraw the Bill for the present.

LORD DENMAN
said, that in the words of a noble Relation of his, the Bill of 1851 was "a mockery, a delusion, and a snare." He wished that the Amendments repealing the Act could have been agreed to. No one had been prosecuted under it—it was a mere insult to the Roman Catholics, as had been remarked by a noble Member of the House of Howard, as to the Preamble of the Bill. The Bill ought to have been a real repeal of the original Act.