FIRST READING. (Hansard, 11 July 1887)

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELAND (Lord ASHBOURNE)
I beg to give Notice that I propose to ask your Lordships to read it a second time tomorrow (Tuesday).

§ LORD HERSCHELL
When shall we have the Bill in our hands?

LORD ASHBOUENE
I believe at 4 o'clock to-morrow.

§ EARL GRANVILLE
I think this is a very unusual course to pursue. We have not got the Bill in our hands, and yet the noble and learned Lord proposes to take the second reading to-morrow. I do not see why there should be such haste in proceeding with so important a measure, and I protest against it.

§ THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY)
I am sorry to have to contradict the noble Earl. I never recommend any speed in dealing with Coercion Bills. As a matter of fact, I believe, without attaching the name "Coercion Bill" to this useful measure, that all Bills dealing with crime in Ireland—and I am told that there have been as many as 87 of them—have always been discussed and proceeded with in this House with as much rapidity as the Forms of the House would permit.

§ EARL GRANVILLE
Then, why does not the noble Marquess suspend the Standing Orders and pass the Bill through all its stages at one Sitting?

THE EARL OF ROSEBERY
I would point out the novel position in which we are placed at this time. This Bill has occupied the House of Commons for a very considerable time—in fact, an unusually long time; but this is not an ordinary Coercion Bill. This is a permanent addition to the law of the land, and I do think that it is a strong measure to have this Bill, when it has only just been introduced, read a first time tonight, to distribute it, possibly, tomorrow morning, and then to ask us to read it a second time to-morrow evening. I have, as you know, peculiar views as to the position in which your Lordships' House stand to the country, and I ask what will be thought of this House if you show this extraordinary precipitation? We are not giving the measure the time we expend on Private Bills. I do not wish to urge this in any Party sense; but I do appeal to the fair feeling of the noble Marquess and of noble Lords opposite to give, at any rate, a decent interval between the circulation of this Bill and the second reading for its consideration.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
said, he did not know whether he rightly understood the noble Earl to say that the 327 Bill should have the same intervals as were assigned to Private Bills.

THE EARL OF ROSEBERY
said, the noble Marquess had misunderstood him. They thought there should be the usual period of intervention between the printing of the Bill and its discussion in the House.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
I do not wish unduly to press noble Lords in the consideration of this measure; but I must say that it is pressing a technicality rather far for noble Lords opposite to try and persuade us that they do not know what is in this Bill. I presume that they have not quite lived hermit's lives, and also that they have not refused entrance to, but that they have had a newspaper in their houses for the last six months. However, as the Front Opposition Bench takes so earnest a tone, I do not think it would be becoming in us to press the matter. I propose, therefore, to take the second reading on Thursday.

§ EARL GRANVILLE
The noble Marquess must be aware that although only five clauses were discussed the changes have been immense. You have omitted the Whiteboy Clauses; you have also abandoned the change of venue to this country; and with regard to the 2nd clause, you have extended about three lines to three pages. To say that, without the Bill in our hands, we should know exactly the state in which it has come up to us, is presuming that we are endowed with an amount of wisdom, which I think is hardly fair for the noble Marquess to attribute to us.