Skip to main content

Parliament—Arrangement Of Public Business—Questions

Volume 230: debated on Tuesday 20 June 1876

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

asked what would be the Business on Thursday? The right hon. Gentleman stated that the Prisons Bill would be taken, but he left the matter in some doubt.

I stated, in indicating the course of Business this week, that on Thursday we proposed moving the second reading of the Prisons Bill; whereupon the hon. Baronet (Sir Walter Barttelot) suggested that that should be postponed in consequence of the impending meeting of the courts of quarter sessions, and I stated I would consider the point. I have considered it, and I must say I see no cause to change the original plan of the Government. Had it been a Motion to go into Committee on the Prisons Bill I should have recognized at once the validity of the objection, for no doubt the courts of quarter sessions are very competent to make, and may make, very valuable suggestions on matters of detail; but as the Motion on Thursday is for the second reading of the Bill, involving the principle on which it is founded, it appears to me the discussion would rather facilitate the discussion of details by the quarter sessions, because they will then become acquainted with the real scope of the measure. Under the circumstances, I shall adhere to the plan which I announced yesterday, and on Thursday we propose to move the second reading of the Prisons Bill.

wished to know whether a day was fixed for the second reading of the Cambridge University Bill?

I assumed that it was the general feeling that we should not advance in our plans of business beyond a week. It is held that that is the best course to pursue, and, generally speaking, that towards the end of the Session it would be advisable for those who are responsible for the conduct of Business to mention at the beginning of the week the course of Business for that period.

asked whether the second reading of the Cambridge Bill would betaken before going into Committee on the Oxford Bill?

believed that arrangement was acceded to by all parties—it was a general understanding.