Skip to main content

Parliament—Business Of The House—Bills Affecting The Clergy—Question

Volume 203: debated on Thursday 21 July 1870

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.

said, he would beg to ask the hon. Member for South-west Lancashire, Whether he intends to proceed with the Sequestration Bill to-night? He also wished to ask Her Majesty's Government whether, in the present exhausted state of the House and of the Session, they will not consider whether it may not be well to postpone to next Session many of those Bills affecting the Clergy, some of which were printed and some not?

said, in reply, that if the Sequestration Bill had been brought down to this House in the state in which it had been originally introduced to the notice of Parliament, it would not have been in his hands; but, as he understood that the objectionable features of the Bill had been removed, he had taken charge of it. Having, at the request of the Solicitor General, hitherto postponed taking the Bill, he would like to put it down for Monday, and then he would state what course he would take.

said, he wished to ask, with regard to two of the Bills to which the right hon. Member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley) had referred, the Union of Benefices Bill and the Resignation of Benefices Bill, whether Her Majesty's Government, in deference to an opinion generally entertained in the House, does not think it would be expedient, after communicating with the promoters of the Bills, to state on Monday next that they would consent to postpone them to another Session?