HL Deb 04 April 1895 vol 32 cc878-9

On Report of Amendment to this Bill,


called attention to what he considered to be an irregularity in the procedure before the Standing Committee. He moved an Amendment on that occasion dealing with the application of the Bill to Ireland. It was put to the Vote, and 12 Peers voted with him and 13 the other way. A noble Lord was present on that occasion who was not a Member of the Standing Committee when, the Bill was first called on, though he admitted that if any noble Lord ought to be on such a Committee it was the Peer to whom he referred—the Lord Chief Justice. That noble Lord's vote was counted in the Division, and the clause remained in the Bill. He understood that while the question was under consideration the name of the Lord Chief Justice was added to the Committee. He did not understand by what means this was done, but he thought it was an extraordinary proceeding. The Lord Chief Justice was not a Member of the Standing Committee, and he had no right to vote. But his vote had made a decided change in excepting Ireland from the operation of the general criminal law of the country; and therefore he objected to the reception of the Report.


said, that while there were two identical Bills dealing with this subject, they were nevertheless perfectly separate. It was incorrect to say that the two Bills had been taken together; they were taken in succession. His noble Friend had objected on principle to the Report of this Bill because of something which had been done on another Bill; but the noble and learned Lord would have an opportunity to restate his objection when the Report connected with the other Bill was moved by his noble and learned Friend, Lord Halsbury.


thought that nothing irregular was done before the Standing Committee, and there was no question as to the Standing Orders having been complied with. During the sitting of the Committee he was informed that the Lord Chief justice desired to serve on the Committee. Lord Kensington and himself, under the Standing Orders, agreed that the noble Lord ought to be placed on the Committee for that occasion. The Standing Order No. 47 distinctly gave power to the Committee of Selection, appointed at the beginning of each Session, to appoint any noble Lord to serve on a Standing Committee. This was constantly being done. It was usually done the day before, but it was not necessary to take action the day before, and there was no compulsion on the Committee of Selection to make any report to the House on the subject. *LORD MORRIS said he would withdraw his objection.

Report received and agreed to.