MR. GLADSTONEsaid, he wished to make an appeal to the hon. Member for East Suffolk (Mr. Corrance) to postpone the Motion he had upon the Paper on the existing state of Pauperism and Vagrancy in England, in order to allow the House to go into Committee on the Irish Church Bill. At the commencement of the proceedings in Committee, as well as upon the second reading of the Bill, he had stated to the House, in accordance, as he believed, with the suggestion of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Buckinghamshire (Mr. Disraeli), that it was the desire of the Government to induce the House to proceed from day to day with the Committee on the Irish Church, whenever it was felt that no matter of urgency stood in the way. It was of great importance that a Bill of that nature should reach the House of Lords, if it was to go there, in very good time in the Session, and, moreover, as many of the provisions were necessarily of so complicated a nature, they would be discussed at a great disadvantage if there was always to be an interval of throe or four days between the several discussions. He had understood last night, indirectly, that the hon. Gentleman the Member for East Suffolk attached great importance to an early discussion of his Motion, and he had caused a communication to be made to 1471 him that he should be very happy to give him the first day at the command of the Government after the close of the proceedings in Committee on the Irish Church Bill. He thought that the hon. Gentleman would do well to accept this offer, for his Motion would be likely to be much more fully considered upon such an occasion than under existing circumstances. He would therefore propose to the hon. Gentleman that the Government should co-operate with him, and procure for his Motion the very earliest day that they could give after the Irish Church Bill was out of Committee on condition that he would kindly consent to withdraw his Motion now. He hoped that other Members who had Motions on the Paper after him would do the same unconditionally, and thus give the House the great advantage of taking up the thread of the discussion they were engaged in last night.
§ MR. CORRANCEsaid, that he must, in the first place, acknowledge the courtesy and kindness with which the right hon. Gentleman's request was made. He regretted that he was not in his place last night when this appeal was first made by the First Lord of the Treasury. He could not, he thought, be accused of throwing obstacles in the way of Public Business, considering that he had withdrawn this very Motion twice already to make room for discussions on the Irish Church; and, if he almost found himself unable to comply with the request of the right hon. Gentleman, it was because he had grave reasons to give for his reluctance. The first was this—he thought it would be admitted by the right hon. hon. Gentleman himself that it was inconvenient that there should be even the appearance of proneness to postpone great social questions affecting the poorer classes only to suit the convenience of the House. If another reason was wanting, it was this—by a Member of the Government—the right hon. Member for Birmingham—they had been publicly reproached with slackness in this very matter. And, in spite of the reference made to the right hon. Gentleman on the front Bench, he did not think that the withdrawal of his Motion would be agreeable to hon. Gentlemen on his own side of the House. He must therefore make a qualified promise. He would withdraw his Motion on these terms—that the right hon. Gentleman would 1472 agree to fix a day, previous to Whitsuntide, for bringing it on.
MR. GLADSTONEassented. He would not fix it to-night, but he would take care to fix a day previous to Whitsuntide. [Mr. CORRANCE made a gesture of remonstrance.] His object was to put the hon. Gentleman in a better position than he might otherwise obtain; because, after seeing the progress that might be made in Committee to-night and Monday, he might be able to fix an earlier day than if he were to fix it now.
§ MR. CORRANCEasked, whether he was to understand that the right hon. Gentleman would give him a day before Whitsuntide, whether the Bill were through Committee or not?
§ MR. CORRANCEsaid, he would accept the offer of the right hon. Gentleman.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, he very thankfully accepted the kindness of the hon. Member, and hoped that now he might be allowed to appeal to other hon. Members to take a similar course.
§ MR. GOLDNEY, said, he had a Notice on the Paper respecting the recently reported frauds of Mr. Benjamin Higgs, the book-keeper in the employ of the Great Central Gas Company. He would not stand in the way of the business of the House, but he wished to ask a Question respecting it of the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade. The subject was an important one, as great losses had been sustained which were likely to fall upon the public; and it was the more urgent as a Bill promoted by one of the gas companies, and which had recently been passed by a Select Committee of that House made important changes in the state of affairs. The Bill of last year gave a controlling power to the Board of Trade, which had acted in a very beneficial manner. But in the Bill passed by the Committee last week that controlling power was omitted. Now he wished to ask whether, if he consented for the second time to postpone his Motion, the Government would support him in stopping any further proceedings with Private Gas Bills till he had an opportunity of bringing forward this question.
§ [Mr. BLAKE, Sir HESEY LYTTOS BULWER, Sir HAEEY VERNEY, Mr. O'REILLY, Sir HENRY SELWIN-IBBET-SON, and Mr. MILLER who had Notices on the Paper withdrew them.]
1473Mr. BRIGHTsaid, he wished to state, in answer to the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Goldney), that from the best information he could obtain he was led to believe that the loss occasioned by the frauds alluded to would not fall upon the consumers. With regard to the general question, he believed that before long there would be an opportunity to bring the whole matter before the House.
§ Mr. NEWDEGATEgave notice that on Monday he would ask the First Lord of the Treasury, when the Motion to rescind the Order of that House for the production of Papers in regard to O'Farrell would be brought on?