HC Deb 08 June 1885 vol 298 cc1413-5
LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL

said, he wished to ask the Prime Minister, How it was that the Government allowed the House to be counted out on Friday evening at 8 o'clock; whether two or three weeks ago, when the House was counted out on a Friday evening, the right lion. Gentleman did not apologize for the occurrence by pleading that the noble Lord the Member for Flintshire (Lord Richard Grosvenor) was wearied by his Parliamentary duties; whether the same excuse applied to Friday evening last; whether, generally, it was not the duty of the Government to keep a House on Friday nights; and, especially, whether it was not the duty of the Government to keep a House last Friday night, after the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the passing of a certain Resolution was essential in justice to a great British industry?

MR. GLADSTONE

I am sorry to be obliged to begin my answer by a correction of a statement made by the noble Lord. I never gave the answer attributed to me by the noble Lord with regard to the former occasion. I did not plead the fatigue of the noble Lord the Member for Flintshire as a reason why a House was not kept. With regard to what happened on Friday night, I will not say the Government had a special duty, but they had a very special desire to keep a House, and they made considerable efforts for that purpose. My noble Friend spoke to me on the subject between 7 and 8 o'clock, and told me of the arrangements he had made to have a sufficient number of Members, as he believed, present until a certain hour, when Members, among' whom I was one, made their arrangements to take the places of those who could not be expected to remain throughout the whole night. But what happened was this. When the House was counted there were present 36 Gentlemen, including the Speaker, so that only four were wanting to make a House. It is certainly the duty of the Government to make every effort they can to keep a House on Friday; but, at the same time, the Government is not prepared to accept that obligation indefinitely, nor is it understood that a number of Members amply sufficient to complete the House are one and all to quit the House on a count being called for. On Friday there were 12 Members present, all of whom found duties elsewhere that made it necessary for them to withdraw when the count was called, and what I have said may therefore appear reasonable to the House. My noble Friend near me did his best to keep a House, and of the 33 Members of the Government 26 were present and were included in the count. It is quite true that on a former occasion I referred to the enormous calls made by my noble Friend upon the supporters of the Government in keeping a House. Irrespective of the fact that there were 30 nights before Christmas, there have been 58 nights since the 19th of February on which it has been the duty of my noble Friend to keep a House. In other words, he has been obliged to more than double the demands he has to make in an ordinary Session. In these circumstances, it is too much to say that because there happened to be a dozen Members not under the immediate influence of the Government who declined to assist in making a House the noble Lord is to be blamed in any way, and the case for impeaching the desire of the Government to do its duty is very greatly weakened in such a state of things.