§ MR. FAWCETTsaid, he rose for the purpose of making an appeal to the hon. Member for Swansea (Mr. Dillwyn) with reference to the Motion which stood in his name for that evening as to the Royal Prerogative. He did not desire at present to say a word as to the merits of that Motion; but he thought he should be expressing the opinion of every hon. Member, when he said that it raised a question of extreme importance and great delicacy. Anyone who knew the hon. Member for Swansea——
§ MR. E. JENKINSrose to Order. He desired to know whether it was in Order for the hon. Member for Hackney to address an appeal to the hon. Member for Swansea with reference to a Motion now before the House?
§ MR. SPEAKERSo far as the hon. Member for Hackney had proceeded, I cannot say that he was out of Order.
§ MR. FAWCETTsaid, that everyone who was acquainted with the hon. Member for Swansea must be aware that he was the last man who would knowingly place the House in an unfair position to consider such a question; and he appealed to his hon. Friend as to whether he did not think that, in consequence of the course he had adopted in the present instance, the House would not approach the discussion of this question with advantage? What were the facts of the case? Six weeks ago, the hon. Member put a Question to the Chancellor of the Exchequer—["Order!"]——
§ MR. SPEAKERThe hon. Member appears to be now entering into the subject of the Motion, and is trenching upon the limits of Order.
§ MR. FAWCETTsaid, he only desired to explain the reasons for making his appeal. The Motion of the hon. Member for Swansea had been on the Paper for six weeks, and arose out of a reply which he received to a Question addressed by him to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Yesterday afternoon, the hon. Member suddenly announced that he was prepared to accept the Amendment of the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. E. Jenkins), and to embody it in his Resolution. The House was thus placed at once in a difficulty——
§ SIR ROBERT PEELrose to Order. Of course, if the hon. Member for Hack- 241 ney intended to conclude with, a Motion, the whole question would be opened at once; but he put it to the Speaker whether it was at all regular for the hon. Gentleman to enter upon the discussion of a matter which was to form the subject of a debate about to take place?
§ MR. SPEAKERNo doubt, it would be quite irregular for the hon. Member to discuss any portion of the matter embraced within the scope of the Motion which the hon. Member for Swansea proposed to submit to the House.
§ MR. FAWCETTdid not say a word as to the merits or demerits of the Motion. He was merely making a statement of facts. His hon. Friend said he accepted the Motion of the hon. Member for Dundee, and late on the previous evening had given Notice of a Resolution in a materially altered form. Now, what he desired to know was, whether it was not contrary to the ordinary usages of Parliament, and inconsistent with the convenience of the House, that Notice of Motion on a most important and delicate question should be given at so late an hour of the previous evening that it was impossible for hon. Members to see it in print, and, therefore, to give adequate Notice of any Amendments to it which they might wish to move? In these circumstances, and not because he was anxious that the Motion should be indefinitely postponed, he bogged to ask his hon. Friend whether he did not think it fair to the House to put off his Resolution for some time longer?
§ MR. DILLWYNsaid, he was rather surprised at the appeal which had been addressed to him. His hon. Friend who had just spoken was present when he (Mr. Dillwyn) had the honour of waiting upon Mr. Speaker with reference to the alteration of the Resolution. He found that a misconception had arisen respecting the object of his Motion; and, therefore, he was glad to accept the Amendment of the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. E. Jenkins), and endeavour to embody it in his Resolution. That Amendment eliminated words which seemed to some hon. Gentlemen objectionable, inasmuch as they appeared to them to reflect upon the action of Her Majesty. The hon. Member for Hackney raised before Mr. Speaker his objection to the alteration of the Motion; but Mr. Speaker's decision was that he (Mr. Dillwyn) was 242 quite in Order. Under these circumstances, he did not see how he would be placing the House in an unfair position by proceeding with his Resolution, as altered; and he did not feel disposed to; respond to the appeal which had just been made to him.