HL Deb 04 September 1880 vol 256 cc1268-9

(The Earl of Kimberley.)

Commons Amendments to Lords Amendments, and Commons reason for disagreeing to one of the Lords Amendments considered (according to order).

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY

explained that the Commons had disagreed from their Lordships' Amendment limiting the right of shooting on the part of the occupier to himself "or" one other person. The Commons had struck out the word "or" and inserted "and" in its stead. He moved that their Lordships do not insist on their Amendment, and that they agree to the Commons' Amendment.

THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES)

pointed out that the words "in lieu of the occupier" had been left out by the Commons in this clause.

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY

said, that they would not now be necessary.

Motion agreed to.

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY

said, the other Amendment which he had to bring before their Lordships was that relating to a close time. The Commons disagreed to the Amendment. He had fully explained the reason why he objected to the Amendment at the time that it was made, and he was very glad that the Commons had struck it out. He moved that their Lordships do not insist on their Amendment, and that they agree to the Commons' Amendment.

THE EARL OF FEVERSHAM

contended that there ought to be a close time for hares, otherwise they 'would be exterminated, and they ought to have some protection at the most important season of the year. The consumers would be in the end the greatest sufferers. He believed there was a strong feeling in favour of the Amendment made by their Lordships, and suggested that some compromise might be made, at least with regard to a close time for hares. An hon. Friend of his in the other House had meant to raise the question, but missed his opportunity, and then found that he was too late to do so.

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY

said, that the question of a close time for hares was raised in the other House and fully discussed, and was negatived by one of the largest majorities, which included many Conservative Members. The Government could not consent to any further Amendment of the Bill.

LORD DENMAN

was quite satisfied that after the Bill became law there would be a wholesale destruction of hares that would be wholly unnecessary, and that the Bill would require amendment.

Motion agreed to.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

moved— That a Message be sent to the Commons that the Lords did not insist upon their Amendment, and agreed to the Amendment of the Commons.

Motion agreed to.