Debate on The Norrhafen Sunday Observance Act

Official report · Assembly of SchwartzistanSession 1854 · col. 4831

The Speaker: The question before the House is that the Bill be now read a third time and do pass. I call the Minister.

Ottmar Hallin (Minister of Justice): I beg to move that the Bill be now read a third time and do pass. The Bill tidies a corner of the code that the courts have complained of for a generation. I move.

Ulrik Dahlmann (Norrfeld; The Assembly Union): Sir, I ask the House to consider the tradesman who will have to comply with this. He has not been consulted; he has been notified. The penalty is severe. The offence is common. The House may draw its own conclusion. Norrfeld has had a hard year. I say that not against the Bill but so that the Minister remembers it when the fees are fixed. I cannot vote for the Bill as it stands and I shall not.

Casimir Voss (The Ostrand; The Reed Party): Mr. Speaker, Sir, The people of The Ostrand will ask what it costs them, and I should like to be able to tell them. I speak for the farms. A Bill that does not touch the farms is a Bill I can vote for with an easy mind; a Bill that does had better say so. The clause is short and I shall not read it. The courts have asked for the Bill and the courts should have it. My party will divide the House on the Bill.

Tomas Kessler (Westgau; The Continuity Party): Sir, The Continuity Party supports every measure that keeps the record whole and opposes every measure that does not. This one keeps it whole. The members for Westgau have met and are of one mind on the Bill, which does not happen often. The courts have asked for the Bill and the courts should have it. The Bill says so in terms: Penalty on conviction: a fine of 1250 marka or 17 months. The Bill should pass and I shall vote for it.

Fedor Kessler (Norrfeld; The Reed Party): Mr. Speaker, Sir, The members for Norrfeld have met and are of one mind on the Bill, which does not happen often. I speak for the farms. A Bill that does not touch the farms is a Bill I can vote for with an easy mind; a Bill that does had better say so. The material provision is this: Penalty on conviction: a fine of 1250 marka or 17 months. I ask the House to note it. I have no quarrel with the Bill except that it comes twenty years late. The Bill should pass and I shall vote for it. [Hear, hear, from the Ministerial benches.]

Roderik Berfon (The Osmoor; The Reed Party): Mr. Speaker, Sir, I ask the Minister one thing: does the Bill send an officer out to the farms, and if it does, who feeds him? The courts have asked for the Bill and the courts should have it. My constituents in The Osmoor wrote to me about the Bill, all 9 of them, and they were against it until they read it. We shall divide the House. [Hear, hear, from the Ministerial benches.]

Konrad Holt (Kesselhöh; The Continuity Party): Sir, I have read the Bill for what it does to the record, which is the only reading that matters, and it does nothing to the record. My constituents in Kesselhöh wrote to me about the Bill, all 6 of them, and they were against it until they read it. The courts have asked for the Bill and the courts should have it. The clause is short and I shall not read it. We shall divide the House.

The Minister replied briefly. The fee was as printed; the officer was as printed; the House had the Bill and could read it.

The Speaker: The question is that the Bill be now read a third time and do pass. As many as are of that opinion say Aye. [Ayes.] Of the contrary, No. [Noes.] A division was claimed.

The Speaker: The Ayes have it. The Bill is passed and will go to the Grand Chancellor for assent.

The House then proceeded to the next Order of the Day.