§ SIR BENJAMIN HALLsaid, that day week he had placed on the books a notice in reference to the administration of the affairs of the Board of Admiralty under the late Government, more particularly with reference to Dockyard Promotions; and on that occasion the late Secretary to the Board of Admiralty, the hon. Member for North Northamptonshire (Mr. Stafford), expressed an earnest hope that he would fix the earliest possible day for bringing that subject before the House. He (Sir B. Hall) did so, and the earliest day he could name was Tuesday next. He took his chance upon the ballot, and from that his name stood third on the list. The House would, perhaps, excuse him if he observed that this was a subject which ought not to be delayed for a moment longer than was absolutely necessary. He had, therefore, to appeal to the hon. and learned Member for Tavistock (Mr. R. Phillimore), and the hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets (Sir W. Clay), who had notices on the books for that day in refer- 1016 ence to one and the same subject, to allow him to take precedence of them on the occasion.
MR. STAFFORDsaid, he must beg permission to add his appeal to that of the hon. Member for Marylebone. He would also appeal to the noble Lord the Member for the City of London (Lord J. Russell) to use his influence with the hon. and learned Member for Tavistock, and the hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets, inasmuch as he might remind the House that two Members of the late Board were Members of the present Board of Admiralty; and therefore the question might be regarded as one which affected the present as well as the late Board of Admiralty.
§ LORD JOHN RUSSELLsaid, he had no hesitation whatever in expressing a hope that the hon. Members for Tavistock and the Tower Hamlets would allow the hon. Baronet's (Sir B. Hall's) Motion to have precedence on Tuesday next.
§ MR. R. PHILLIMOREsaid, he had no desire to take a course which the House might regard as objectionable; but the notice which stood upon the books in his name was one of very considerable importance, and as the hon. Baronet the Member for the Tower Hamlets (Sir W. Clay) had a Motion for the same evening, and upon the same subject, he (Mr. Phillimore) was scarcely at liberty to act alone in the matter. He would have no objection, however, to act in concert with the hon. Baronet, and would accede to the request now made, if the hon. Baronet would consent to accede also.
§ SIR WILLIAM CLAYsaid, he had every inclination to act with perfect courtesy to the House; but he must say that the appeal now made to him was, to say the least of it, very unusual. The ordinary circumstances under which an appeal was made for the withdrawal of a Motion, had reference to the resumption of an adjourned debate; but he could not call to mind any one instance in which an appeal was made to an hon. Member under such circumstances as the present. Private Members had now only one night in the week at their disposal; and, if they were to be met by solicitations to withdraw their notices in favour of others which might be thought more important, he could not see what advantage there would be in having a ballot at all. The Motion of which he had given notice, was one of very great importance, and he could not consent to withdraw it unless the noble Lord (Lord 1017 J. Russell) would place at his disposal one of the Government nights. If the noble Lord would consent to do this, he (Sir W. Clay) would comply with the request now made to him, but not otherwise.
§ Subsequently,
§ SIR WILLIAM CLAYsaid, he wished to state to the House that he had received an intimation that the noble Lord the Member for the City of London was willing to afford facilities for bringing on the Motion which stood in his name with regard to Church Rates; and, therefore, so far as he was concerned, he willingly gave way in order to enable the discussion concerning Admiralty appointments to be preceded with on Tuesday next.
§ MR. R. PHILLIMOREexpressed his concurrence with the course taken by the hon. Baronet.