HC Deb 28 July 1881 vol 264 cc34-5
MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR

asked the Prime Minister, what would be the course of Public Business to-morrow; whether he had in contemplation to make any exceptional proposal with regard to the Business of Supply, and what would be the order of the different Departments?

MR. GLADSTONE, in reply, said, that with regard to the order of Supply, they would proceed with the Civil Service Votes to-morrow; presuming they were able to achieve the third reading of the Land Bill to-night, as they all seemed to hope, the Business would be Supply. He thought, perhaps, that that statement almost dispensed with the necessity at the present time for any further explanation.

SIR JOHN HAY

asked, whether it was the intention of the Government to take the 27 Votes of the Army Estimates, or the four Votes of the Navy Estimates first?

MR. GLADSTONE, in reply, said, he believed the Army Votes were of greater urgency than those of the Navy. Notice of the intentions of the Government in this respect would, however, be given in the course of the evening.

MR. CALLAN

asked the Prime Minister, whether it was the intention of the Government to re-commit the Land Bill after Report for the purpose of enabling the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Westminster (Mr. W. H. Smith) to move the insertion of the clause of which he had given Notice? He put the Question, because, if this were the intention of the Government, his hon. Friends wished to move the insertion of clauses respecting the labourers.

MR. GLADSTONE, in reply, said, there was no Question at all before the House for the re-committal of the Bill, except the limited Question of the right hon. Gentleman opposite. The proposal of the re-committal would be over the clause relating to the retirement of the Commissioners, enabling a discussion to be taken upon it, and for no other purpose whatever. It would in no way reopen the whole subject of the Bill.

MR. CALLAN

asked, whether it would not be open to any hon. Member to move an Amendment upon the clause intended to be moved by the right hon. Member for Westminster? He would suggest that the Instruction could be amended, in order to include the Question he had indicated.

MR. GLADSTONE

The prospect which the hon. Member holds out is really so grave, and I might almost say so appalling, that I do not know what answer to make; but I really hope that when the time comes, he will be in a more reasonable frame of mind. No doubt, he has the abstract right to move to extend the purpose for which the Bill is being re-committed, but I trust that he will not exercise it.