COLONEL KNOXsaid, he wished to call attention to a matter affecting the Privileges of Members. It would be recollected that it was stated the other night that on the occasion of the naval review a ship would be allotted to the Members of each House of Parliament, and that every Member would have one ticket at whatever time he might make the application for it. However, on making an application for a ticket he had been refused, in consequence, as he had been informed through the courtesy of the Speaker's secretary, of orders from the Secretary to the Admiralty, stating that only 450 tickets would be issued. He understood that the vessel appointed for the accommodation of the House of Commons was the Peninsular and Oriental steamship Ripon, which carried out a battalion of Guards to Malta, 1,000 strong, besides a contingent of Artillery and commissariat stores; he therefore thought there could be no doubt of there being accommodation for a much larger number than 450 Members of the House of Commons. When he applied for his ticket he was told he had not applied in time. He understood that every Member who applied for a ticket could obtain one; but it now appeared that the Admiralty had drawn an arbitrary line, and the whole arrangement appeared to him to have been most objectionable. If the Members for whom accommodation was provided were restricted to 450, what was to become of the officers of the House? He understood the practice had been for Members to inquire among their friends who did not want tickets, and to have the names of such put down, so as to draw tickets for them. The consequence would be that not more than perhaps 150 Members would be present, and the complement would be made up of they did not know who. He thought there was great hardship in this case. He had postponed applying for his ticket, but on the faith of what had been stated in the House he had a right to suppose that whenever Members sent for their ticket they would receive it. He wished to know what explanation of this affair could be offered by the noble Lord the Secretary for the Admiralty?
§ MR. SPEAKERsaid, this is not a question of Parliamentary Privilege, but, as it relates to the convenience of Members, I have no doubt the Secretary to the Admiralty, who has had these arrangements 1520 to make, will be able to explain. With regard to the particular vessel employed, and so forth, if it be necessary for my part to add anything, I shall be happy to do so; but I must at once say I have never seen a greater desire to provide for the accommodation of Members than appeared to me to be exercised by the noble Lord.
COLONEL KNOXsaid, I will to-morrow repeat my Questions if the noble Lord is not able to answer them now.
LORD HENRY LENNOXI shall be delighted to answer any Questions that may be put by my hon. and gallant Friend, but the Parliamentary usage is that the First Lord of the Admiralty should answer Questions if he is present in the House.
MR. CORRYsaid, my hon. and gallant Friend has not quite accurately represented my answer on the occasion to which he has referred. What I stated was that two vessels would be provided — one for the House of Lords, and one for the House of Commons. That the House of Lords should have 400 tickets, and the House of Commons 450. A notice was placed on the door of the House — in fact on both doors, and all about the House, and Members could have used their eyes to very little purpose if they had not seen it—that no tickets would be issued after the 8th of July. This was not an arbitrary rule; there was a substantial reason for it—namely, to enable the Admiralty to make arrangements with the railway companies, which they could not do without knowing for what number of passengers it would be necessary to provide; and I am sure no one acquainted with the difficulty of making such arrangements would find fault with us on that account. It was with a view to accommodate the House of Commons that we arranged that no application for tickets should be made after the 8th of July. By the 8th of July, I forget the exact number of tickets issued, but I believe only 230 applications had been made; and therefore we were anxious to make what arrangements we could to give accommodation to the ladies belonging to the families of hon. Members. We therefore stated that, as only 230 tickets had been applied for, any Member who chose to apply for an additional ticket 1521 might have it, until the limit of 450 was reached. After the 8th of July the interest in the review seems to have increased, and applications for tickets came in in great numbers. Already 500 have been issued; 450 for the Ripon and fifty for the China; and that is precisely the number issued for the naval review in 1856, when 500 Members were present, but ladies were not then admitted; so that the House will see that the present Board of Admiralty have been more gallant than the former Board. My hon. and gallant Friend says it is very absurd to suppose that the Ripon having carried 1,000 soldiers to Malta has not accommodation for more than 450 Members; but soldiers do not remain on deck all the time they are at sea. The greater portion of them are usually below; and hon. Members would not like to be packed on deck like sheep in a pen: 450 is the largest number the Ripon will accommodate with convenience.
§ MR. OSBORNEI wish to put an equally important question to the First Lord of the Admiralty—whether arrangements have been made that the same fate shall not befall the Members of the House of Commons as befell the troops the other day at Hounslow?
§ MR. OSBORNEMy question referred to victuals.
MR. CORRYI beg my hon. Friend's pardon. Luncheon will be provided, and an ample supply of sherry, beer, and brandy.