I move: "That item 9 on the Orders of the Day (The Courts of Justice Bill, 1923—Committee) be discharged and that it be inserted on the Orders of the Day for Wednesday next." I intended to move the adjournment of the Dáil this evening for a week as we are arranging conferences and otherwise are engaged in connection with the industrial unrest in the country. It appears to us that it would be better that we should be able to devote the whole of our time to try and find an accommodation which we hope will be satisfactory. I have called one meeting for this evening. It was not possible owing to other activities to have called it earlier. I intend if possible to have another meeting to-morrow and a third meeting, if it be possible, on Friday. For that reason I would ask that the Dáil should adjourn for a week. In that case we would not take up The Courts of Justice Bill until this day week.
THE COURTS OF JUSTICE BILL, 1923.
On that point may I ask if it will be possible to take further amendments now, in view of the fact that the Government has thought fit to postpone this Bill?
It will be feasible then to accept further amendments. I might suggest that, as far as I am aware, very few people in the country are in great haste over this Bill, and I have seen it mentioned in the newspapers that the Attorney-General is about to take his place in the Dáil. If that is so, I would seriously suggest that it would be a good thing for the Dáil and the country if the Government could wait until the Attorney-General could be present here to take part in the discussion of the Bill, and give us the great benefit of his knowledge and experience in dealing with the legal aspects of this measure.
I do not know that the Deputy is in a position to be as closely in touch with the general opinions throughout the country as I am. I made many pilgrimages through the country during the last few months. My impression is that there is a desire for this Bill, but, apart from that desire, the Constitution is not yet complete without it. This matter has been before the country for some time. It was objected to in the last Dáil that it should be rushed, but I would say that, even in the case of measures which, perhaps, were hastened in the last Dáil, there was at all times—it may be admitted by all Deputies—very fair and considerate expressions from Ministers with regard to recommendations made about the Bills. I do not know that the Deputy is quite aware of the fact that there was very serious misgiving in certain parts of the country that this question had not been dealt with earlier, and many representations were made to us on that point. There was in general, I think, the impression that we intended to act in good faith and that the delays were not unreasonable. Even since the Bill had been introduced very little criticism or suggestions which would improve the measure have come from the business people on whose behalf application was made that the Bill should be postponed. I think there have not been material recommendations from them, and I think the Deputy will be satisfied when it is considered here that it will get very fair consideration, and it should not appear necessary to wait until any other legal gentlemen are returned to the Dáil. I think the legal gentlemen in the last Dáil were surprised at the ability with which measures were dealt with by those who have not had any association with the law.
I would like to ask the President to give the Dáil some indication of what is to be the course of business.
I think we have to settle what we have to do about the Committee Stage of this Bill before we take up that question. Am I to take it that the Committee Stage is to be taken on Wednesday next?
Committee Stage postponed to Wednesday, the 10th October.