§ SIR JOHN PAKINGTONsaid, he wished to make a serious appeal to Her Majesty's Government, and more especially to the noble Lord the First Minister of the Crown, whether it was for the convenience and advantage of that House that they should continue the practice of allowing desultory debates upon an unlimited number of subjects on the Motions for the adjournment of the House. If it were the opinion of the House that the advantages of the system predominated he should be ready to yield to that feeling, but his own opinion was exactly opposite. That evening no less than eight subjects had been brought under the notice of the House, and last Friday Her Majesty's Government were reduced to the absurd position that, when an hon. Friend of his put a question to them, they were unable to answer because all the Members of the Government had already spoken upon what, by courtesy, was called "the question," It appeared to him that 889 they ought to take one course or the other; either organise the practice and reduce it to something like shape and regularity, or resume what was formerly the practice of the House, and was still the practice with regard to questions on other occasions—that questions should be asked without the power of making speeches and raising debates upon them. The contrary practice had now reached such a height that he hoped the Government would consider it.
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTON,who had already spoken on the question of adjournment, said, he was in the unfortunate position to which the right hon. Baronet had alluded.
§ Motion for the adjournment of the House till Monday was then agreed to.