:

MR. T. GIBSON BOWLES (Lynn (make it perfectly plain to the public in Regis) I have more than once in this the text of the Bill that women are qualiHouse protested against legislation by fied to represent people on the district council. In view of the widespread inte. rest taken in this question throughout the country, I hope the Government will see its way to concede this small point, in order that there will be no doubt about it at all as to the meaning of the Bill.

reference and allusion as an abuse of our

system of legislation. Sir, the system of legislation by reference and allusion is extremely mischievous, and the right honourable Gentleman himself and his colleagues on the third Bench below the

Gangway say that this course is only pur-think there is a very practical reason for *MR. MCKENNA (Monmouth, N.): I

this Amendment, for there are five Orders in Council, and it is extremely difficult

sued because the Government dare not submit to Parliament the proposals they embody in these Orders in Council in their Bill. It has been again and again to find which are the particular paraadmitted that this is so, and it is now graphs that apply to married women. admitted again here. I have certain pro- In the Orders which I hold in my hand posals which I wish to embody in this Act I find there are five different indexes, of Parliament, and if I did embody them and consequently the woman who desires I could not get the House of Commons to consider them, or they would not to know if she is eligible to stand will adopt them. I am, therefore, forced to meet with great difficulty in discovering put the effective part of my proposal into what is the law. She will first of all another document, and legislate by refer- have to consult the Act of Parliament, ence. What I wish to point out is this: and she will find that she is disqualified that I have heard constantly of legisla- because, although an Act which already tion by reference and allusion to other exists does give her the necessary qualifiStatutes. Now, that is abusive enough, and that is improper enough, but how cation, that is repealed, and that will much more abusive and improper give her the impression that she is not is it to legislate by allusion and qualified. She will then, probably, be reference not only to Statutes themselves, but also to an Order in Council, which is no part of the legislation of the country, but which is an act of the executive, and finds no place in the Statute Book. Sir, I say that this is an outrageous exaggeration of the principle of legislation by reference. Without reference or allusion to existing Statutes we are now asked to legislate by reference to an enormously long Order in Council, which is itself as long as two or three Acts of Parliament. I am surprised, after the replies we got, that the Government is going to pursue this vicious system of making it impossible to ascertain I cannot accept them. what is the real meaning of the Act.

MR. M. DAVITT : There would be some point in the argument of the honourable Member for King's Lynn if the proposal before us were to add the whole of the Order in Council to the Bill. But that is not the proposal in the Amendment of the right honourable Baronet. What he wants to do is to

told to refer to the Orders in Council, but as no references are given in the Bill itself to the particular paragraphs of the Orders, it will be impossible for any ordinary person to discover easily what the law is on the subject.

MR. W. JOHNSTON: The right honourable Gentleman probably has no difficulty in finding those words in the Order. Perhaps he would have no objection to allowing them to be inserted in the Bill.

MR. GERALD BALFOUR: I am afraid

*MR. SERJEANT HEMPHILL: I trust the right honourable Baronet will go to a Division on this Amendment if the right honourable Gentleman the Chief Secretary does not accept it. I pointed cut, some days ago, in the course of the Debate, that in a matter of such importance as this, which deals with the qualification of a large mass of the popula

ascertain the meaning of the Act of Parliament, have no real existence whatever. The ordinary man and woman even now do not desire to consult Acts of Parliament, and they will not desire to do so in future. They will know, if this Bill is passed, that married women are eligible to sit on district councils, as provided by the Order in Council, and there will be no doubt whatever about the law on the subject.

tion, namely, the married women, we | criticisms as to the confusion and doubt, should not trust to this or that refer- and the possibility of not being able to ence, to this or that Order in Council. In the first place, that particular Order in Council may not be adopted by the Privy Council in Dublin. The Privy Council in Dublin has a right-and I have no doubt will exercise it-to modify any of the clauses, and, according to their law and constitution, it may be put to the vote at the Privy Council whether a particular clause shall pass or not. There may be occasions on which it is necessary to rely upon an Order in Council, rather than to spread it out on the face of the Bill. But this is a simple Amendment to remove all possible doubt. In three lines it shows that there is no question as to whether a woman is qualified to be a district councillor, and the fact of her being a married woman should be no disqualification. Why, for the sake of consistency, or for any other reason, that simple point should not be put upon the face of the Act of Parliament, I, for my part, cannot understand. against legislation by reference, I

SIR H. H. FOWLER (Wolverhampton. E.): I have great sympathy with my honourable Friend who has just sat down, and I have also with many Members of the House, because I have had a very painful experience myself of carrying through the House a Measure of a similar character to that which is now before the House. When I heard just now the Member for King's Lynn protesting

to

MR. L. H. COURTNEY (Cornwall, thought I had heard that speech before Bodmin): I have no doubt that my right on a similar Bill before the House. I honourable Friend the Chief Secretary quite agree with my honourable Friend does not need any encouragement upon who has just sat down that he must this point. I quite approve of the adopt this mode of carrying through this method of proceeding which the Govern- Bill.I do not suppose many Members would ment have adopted, because I think it is like to contemplate the prospect of this most desirable that we should recognise Bill being 40 or 60 days, as the English the necessity of relieving Bills of all Local Government Bill was, in Comdetails which can be dealt with indepen-mittee. I think it is to the interest of dently. But supplementing a Measure all who desire that this Bill should be by Orders in Council, where it can be done with advantage, as in the present case, is, in my opinion, a very wise procedure, and one which every foreign Legislature adopts. As to the Bill itself, it has been made as simple as possible by the principle of these Orders in Council, and I think the course adopted in the present Bill is a great improvement on the previous machinery. We have been legislating by reference of a most intricate kind, but in this case it is plain and simple, because you have all the supplementary provisions taken in order. The only thing that is necessary now is that the Orders shall be obtainable as easily and expeditiously as any of the Acts themselves. Therefore the Mr. Serjeant Hemphill.

passed. that we should facilitate, as far as possible, any reasonable arrangement that the Government may make narrow down the actual legislation in the Bill to what are beyond all question matters of contention. But I think this case hardly comes within that category. This has not been so clear a matter as my right honourable Friend who has just sat down seems to think, as he has presented it to the House. Now, when I was at the head of the Local Government Board I expressed a very strong opinion that no board of guardians in this country was properly qualified unless a woman were upon it, and I hold the view now which I held then, because the admission of women to boards of guardians has been such a great success in England. I

was confronted, when the Bill of 1894 | stand what objection there can be to was before the House, with a very serious inserting these lines. I do not think the difficulty, and that was whether married right honourable Gentleman in any way women were legally competent to dis- infringes the principle that all non-concharge those duties, although there was troversial matters shall be put in the no question about single women. Practi- Order in Council, and he will make this cally, the law was to be enforced by the Bill clear beyond all question. At all electors themselves, because the Local events, it will settle the principle by Government Board always declined to actual legislation. express any opinion upon that point, but Presidents of the Local Government MR. GERALD BALFOUR: The cases Board, who held certain views, encouraged which the right honourable Gentleman the election of married women without who has just spoken alluded to are altopositively saying that it was legal. From gether dissimilar. The Amendment prothe point of view of the Local Govern- posed does not alter the intention of the ment Board, we fought that question, and the words were put in which my right honourable Friend now wishes to put into this Bill in order that there should be no disqualification either by sex or marriage. Now, I understand that the right honourable Gentleman does not object at all to these words, because they already appear in the Order in Council, I understand.

SIR HENRY FOWLER: It is by way of addition.

MR. GERALD BALFOUR : Undoubtedly. The introduction of the words proposed by the right honourable Baronet will in no sense alter the effect of the Bill.

*SIR CHARLES DILKE: Not if taken

MR. GERALD BALFOUR: Yes, they together.

are.

MR. GERALD BALFOUR: The Bill SIR HENRY FOWLER: Then it is and the Order in Council are to be taken simply a question that there should be together all through. The right honourno possibility of a mistake on this ques-able Gentleman speaks of this as having tion. Let me appeal to the right honour- been a matter of controversy, but there able Gentleman as to what he himself has done. Under clause 19 he has distinctly enacted that

A person shall not be qualified to be elected or to be a councillor of the council of a county district unless he is a local govern

ment elector for the district."

And he has actually amended that, and carried it a step further by the last Amendment that was put from the Chair, namely―

or has during the whole of the twelve months preceding the election resided, and continues to reside, in the district."

Now, if that is right to be put in, and I think it is a reform, why not put the other question in, around which there has gathered a controversy, and in reference to which there is much difference of opinion, although I do not think the effect will be different? I quite admit that the Order in Council will be the statutory authority, but I cannot under

is no doubt in the mind of anyone as to what the law means. We have put this into the Order in Council because it was simply our object to bring up the law in Ireland as regards election under the Bill to a district or a county council exactly to the point where it already stands in England and Scotland, and we did it in this way purposely in order to avoid the introduction of anything contentious. In this Bill we have strictly carried out my undertaking that what was put in the Orders in Council might be regarded as non-controversial. One word more in reference to what has fallen from the honourable Member for King's Lynn in regard to legislation by reference. I may say that I agree with what has fallen from the right honourable Gentleman the Member for Bodmin, that this method of legislating by Orders in Council is, in many respects, a very great improvement on the old system of legislating by reference, which taxed so

AYES.

Donelan, Captain A.
Doogan, P. C.
Doughty, George
Duckworth, James
Dunn, Sir William
Esmonde, Sir Thomas
Evershed, Sydney
Farquharson, Dr. Robert
Fenwick, Charles
Ferguson, R. C. M. (Leith)
Fitzmaurice. Lord Edmond
Flavin, Michael Joseph
Flynn, James Christopher
Fowler, Rt. Hn. SirH. (Wol'tn)
Goddard, Daniel Ford
Gold, Charles

Greene, W. Raymonde-(Cambs.)
Grey, Sir Edw. (Berwick)
Haldane. Richard Burdon
Harwood, George
Hayden. John Patrick

Havne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-
Hedderwick, Thos. Chas. H.
Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Chas. H.
Holburn, J. G.
Holden, Sir Angus
Hudson, Geo. Bickersteth
Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)
Jacoby, James Alfred
Jameson, Major J. Eustace