§ SIR ROBERT PEELSir, I beg to rise to a point of Order. The Question 1431 which I yesterday gave Notice of and read in the House, and which was framed according to the highest authority on such matters, does not appear, from some strange alteration, upon the Paper of the day. I will, with your permission, Sir, read the Question of which I gave Notice yesterday, and then it will be seen the great difference which exists between them. That Question is to this effect—
Whether, inasmuch as some years ago, in the interests of humanity and liberty, and principally owing to the noble appeals of the right hon. Gentleman the present Member for Greenwich, the Government of that day took steps to mitigate the horrors of the State persecutions of the Neapolitan Government, do the British Government now propose to take any steps towards mitigating, in the interests of humanity, the horrors and atrocities in which the Reign of Terror in Russia is now carried on over eighty millions of people?That is my Question of which I gave Notice yesterday; but the Question on the Paper is very different. The Question on the Notice Paper appears in these terms—To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, inasmuch as some years ago, in the interests of humanity, the Government of the day took steps to mitigate the horrors of the State prosecutions of the Neapolitan Government, Her Majesty's present Government propose to take any steps towards mitigating the severities now being practised in Russia against persons suspected of being concerned in the Nihilist conspiracyNow, my Question has no reference to any conspiracies of the Nihilists. I read in the public journals, and I see in every public paper of Europe, statements headed. "Reign of Terror in Russia," and in confirmation of the Question which I have put I will read a statement of what the present condition of Russia is—The principal measure which has been taken by the Russian Government is to determine in a summary manner all civil liberty.That is what the right hon. Member for Greenwich (Mr. Gladstone) inveighed against in the case of the Neapolitans of that day.All Russia is in a state of siege. The life and liberty and property of every Russian are at the mercy of any one of the eleven Generals appointed by the Government of Russia over the military districts. The Government of Russia is at war with the people of Russia.It was owing to that statement, which 1432 every man in this country, and which every liberal-minded man in the country must deplore, that I ventured to put this Question, which is not on the Paper, but which has been altered by someone and made to refer to severities practiced by the Russian Government upon persons suspected of being connected with the Nihilist conspiracy. Now, I know nothing of persons concerned in a Nihilist conspiracy. In fact, I have not been able to find anyone who can tell me the meaning of the word "Nihilism." I have here a vast quantity of documents to prove that it is not against the Nihilists that I gave notice of this Question, but against a state of things in that country which, as the right hon. Member for Greenwich stated in his time as regarding the Neapolitans, was a disgrace to humanity and civilization. I do not know whether I should be at liberty to read some extracts from English and foreign newspapers which refer to this matter—
§ MR. SPEAKERI wish to point out to the right hon. Baronet that the Question which he submitted yesterday to the House was not in Order, and I will endeavour to explain to the right hon. Baronet in what respect the Question was out of Order. The right hon. Baronet does not seem to be aware of the difference between a Question put to Ministers upon matters of fact and a Motion to be submitted to this House which may apply to any question that becomes a proper subject for debate in this House. If the right hon. Baronet desires to raise a question which involves matter of debate and argument, a Motion of that kind should be submitted to this House in the form of a Motion, and not in the form of a Question to a Minister. Questions put to Ministers should be on matters of fact, and not involving matters of argument and debate; and the terms of the Question which the right hon. Baronet proposed to put yesterday were in these respects out of Order, and, therefore, that Question was altered by my authority. If the right hon. Baronet desires to raise the question of which he gave Notice yesterday, in the terms of which he gave Notice, it should be put in the form of a Motion, and submitted for debate to this House.
§ SIR ROBERT PEELI bow with every respect to the ruling of the Chair; but I would venture most respectfully to submit that the words I use now are 1433 words which appear in the Records of this House for 1852 and 1853, as having been put as Questions to the Government of the day; and over and over again, two or three years ago, we had Questions put to Ministers of the Crown respecting the atrocities in Bulgaria in almost the same words as those which I use. Of course, I do not mean, and I should not for one moment venture, to stand against the opinion of Mr. Speaker; but I must venture, and I do most respectfully submit, that I never could have asked a Question with respect to persons suspected of being concerned in the Nihilist conspiracy, because, as I have already said, I know nothing whatever about them. But, Sir, as I do not see the Minister to whom I put the Question has had the courtesy to appear in his place, and as I recollect Lord Palmerston saying in this House that if a Minister did not come down to answer a Question which was put on the Paper, and which he was bound to answer, his absence was an act of disrespect to the Member putting it—
§ MR. SPEAKERI must point out to the right hon. Baronet that he is not entitled to introduce matter of debate.
§ SIR ROBERT PEELI wish to ask you, Sir, whether, as I put down a Question on this most important matter, I may not bring it under the notice of the House, in the same way as it was brought under notice in my time—27 years ago—with regard to Naples? I want to know what I am to do in this matter, because I do not intend to put a Question respecting persons concerned, or persons suspected of being concerned, in the Nihilist conspiracy. I wish to point out that persons who are innocent are subject to these horrors. Then, of whom am I to ask the Question? Shall I put it to the gallant Admiral (Admiral Sir William Edmonstone) who sits behind the Treasury Bench? Will the gallant Admiral answer it? Sir, I believe I should be perfectly in Order in remaining on my legs until some Minister comes to answer the Question.
§ MR. SPEAKERI must call upon the right hon. Baronet to allow the House to proceed to the Orders of the Day. The Clerk will now proceed to road the Orders of the Day.
§ SIR ROBERT PEELBefore you put that Question, Sir, may I venture to ask if I can put my Question down for another day?
§ MR. SPEAKERCertainly not the Question of which the right hon. Baronet gave Notice yesterday. That Question w7ould necessarily require to be revised, so as to make it consistent with the Rules and Orders of the House. If the right hon. Baronet will revise it accordingly, he is perfectly free to put the Question; and if the right hon. Gentleman desires to proceed by a Motion, of course, he can do that on any day he thinks proper.
§ MAJOR O'GORMANI should like to ask the right hon. Baronet whether he gave distinct Notice of his Question to a Minister of the Crown?
§ SIR ROBERT PEELYes; I gave Notice of it verbally.
§ MAJOR O'GORMANThen, Sir, I think it is very disrespectful to the House and to the right hon. Baronet that no Minister of the Crown is present to answer the Question.