HL Deb 11 August 1888 vol 330 c383

Commons' Amendments considered (according to order).

THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY)

said, he wished to renew, in a most emphatic form, the protest which he had just made against the introduction of Amendments to a Consolidation Bill. There were several Amendments introduced into the Bill in regard to which he should certainly have taken the sense of the House, as he did not agree with them, were it not for the period at which the Bill came before them and his fear of jeopardizing its passing. He introduced the measure simply as a Consolidation Bill, the first step towards the amendment of the law being to reduce to a compact form what the law was. Under the circumstances, he had no alternative but to propose that their Lordships should agree with the Commons in their Amendments, but, at the same time, uttered his protest against the practice. He might point out that the noble and learned Lord (Lord Herschell) held that the subject the Bill dealt with required amendment, but that he had refrained from bringing forward Amendments, as the Bill was one purely for consolidating purposes.

LORD HERSCHELL

agreed with the noble and learned Lord that the practice of inserting Amendments in Consolidation Bills was very inconvenient; but, at the same time, stated that the temptation offered to do so when Consolidation Bills were brought forward was more than some hon. Members could resist. It was frequently the only opportunity which presented itself for attempting to amend an objectionable law. In very few cases could Amendments be effected otherwise than by a Bill promoted by the Government, private Members' Bills having very little chance of passing.

Commons' Amendments agreed to.