The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1878-05-25 00:00:00

been adopted until Parliament had been consulted. No
reason had been given for this secrecy, no diplomatic advan-
tage had been secured by it, and the transport arrange-
ments would certainly have bean more economically
carried out had the intention of the Government been
announced. He replied, also, in detail to arguments of the
Attorney-General and Mr. E. Stanhope, founded on the
fourth clause of the Mutiny Act, the existence of Colonial
Corps, and the employment of Indian troops in China,
Singapore, &c., and the debate was then adjourned until
Thursday, on the motion of Mr. Cross.
The Irish Sunday Closing Bill was further considered in
committee, and, some other business having been disposed
of, the House adjourned at twenty minutes past one o'clock.

In the HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 22, Mr. O'Shaughnessy, in
moving the second reading of the Rating of Towns (Ireland)
Bill, explained that its object was to remove certain diffi-
culties which at present hindered many persons from exer-
cising the franchise who were entitled to be placed upon the
regiater. The Bill did not involve any extension of the fran-
chise, nor the admission of any class who were not now en-
titled to possess it. Its purpose, in fact, was to assimilate
the law of Ireland to that of England.
Mr. Mulholland moved the rejection of the Bill.
In the course of the discussion which followed, Sir C. Dilke,
Mr. Bruen, Mr. D. Plunkett, Mr Gibson, Mr. Biggar, Mr.
Lowther, and other hon. members took part. Eventually
the House divided, when the numbers were—For the
second reading, 177 ; against, 224 ; majority against, 47.
The Bill wa, accordingly rejected.
On the order for the second reading of the Contagious
Diseases Acts Repeal Bill, a number of petitions were pre-
sented in its favour.
Sir H. Johnstone, in moving the second readirg of the
Bill, was proceeding to show cause for the proposed
legislation, when he was interrupted by Mr. A. Moore, who
drew the Speaker's attention to the fact of strangers being
present.
The Speaker said he felt bound to take the same course
as he had followed on a former occasion. The right hon
gentleman then put the question—" That strangers should
be ordered to withdraw."

The Speaker having heard the response declared that the
"Noes" had it.

This decision having been challenged by several voices,
the House was cleared for a division.

The Speaker then asked the hon. member whether he
wished to repeat his motion. Mr. A Moore having replied in
the negative, _ _

Sir 11. Johnstone resumed his speech, and proceeded to
refer to the statistical returns of the operation of the law as
far as regarded the military and naval forces of the coun-
try.
Mr. A. Moore, again moved "that the Ladies' Gallery be
cleared."

The Speaker, objecting to put such a motion, said if he
thought this Bill would have come on for discussion to-day
he should have given instructions that messengers of the
House at the Ladies' Gallery should intimate to them that a
subject of a very delicate nature was likely to come under
the consideration of the House.

Sir H. Johnstone once more resumed his observations,
when

Mr. A. Moore, again intervening, moved, "That strangers
be ordered to withdraw."

The Speaker informed the hon. member that he had
already made such a motion, which, having been disposed
of, he could not repeat it.
Sir H. Johnstone then proceeded with his statemente
without farther interruption.
The Bill was eventually talked out and the House
adjourned.