BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

HC Deb 12 March 1858 vol 149 cc76-82

On the Motion for adjournment till Monday,

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

Sir, I think it is due to the House that I should take the earliest opportunity of communicating to it, that within the last hour Her Majesty's Government have received a despatch from the French Ambassador in answer to a similar document, which has been addressed to the French Government by the Secretary of State; and I have great pleasure in informing the House that those painful misconceptions which unhappily for a time subsisted between the Governments of the two countries have entirely terminated. They have been adjusted in a spirit both friendly and honourable, and in a manner which I believe will be satisfactory to the feelings, as I am sure it will be conducive to the interests and the happiness, of both nations. The moment, Sir, that we receive Her Majesty's permission it will be my duty to lay the whole i of the correspondence that has recently taken place on this subject upon the table of the House. I will also take this opportunity, with the permission of the House, to indicate the course we propose to pursue in respect to public business. The requirements of the public service are at this moment so urgent that I shall have to appeal to the cordial assistance and co-operation of the House, in order that we may be able to carry before Easter those measures that are absolutely necessary to be passed for the public service of the country. There is, Sir, at this moment a Supply necessary fur the service both of the present and the impending financial year. With regard to the Supply necessary for the present year, the House will recollect that at the close of the last Session of Parliament, in the month of August, in consequence of the revolt in India, the House passed a Bill empowering Her Majesty to embody the militia, under circumstances different from those contemplated by the then existing law. By the law, as it then stood, Her Majesty could not embody the militia unless the country was in fear of foreign invasion, or was in an actual state of war. In the month of August, although we were not in apprehension of invasion, or in what could be called actual war, the House felt that, under the circumstances of the case, and in order to meet the drain upon our troops caused by the events in India, it was necessary, for one year at least, to give Her Majesty the power of embodying the militia without the existence of those conditions specified in the law. Now, the state of affairs in India is not such as, in our opinion, renders it prudent that that privilege, on the part of Her Majesty, should be allowed to expire; and, therefore, we propose to ask the House at once to continue it for another year. But in consequence of the Bill passed in August, a considerable expenditure was incurred for the embodiment of the militia, which was not contemplated when the Estimates were proposed, and when they received the approbation of the House. I think that for the embodiment of the militia a Vote of £200,000 only was taken. But the expenditure occasioned in consequence of the passing of this Bill in August has been, I should say, upwards of, or at least equal to, £700,000. It will, therefore, be necessary to pass a supplementary Vote in reference to this increased expenditure on account of the militia. That Estimate will, I believe, be presented to-night, and will come in due course under the consideration of a Committee of Supply. With regard to the Supplies to Her Majesty for the approaching financial year, which must be voted before the Mutiny Bill is introduced, we propose to take the course usually permitted to a Government under the extraordinary circumstances in which the House is placed. I ask the House, therefore, to permit us to take Votes on account of the public service. But without the utmost assistance and indulgence of the House it will, by a calculation I have made, be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to pass the Ways and Means Bill, which must be the result of the Vote of Supply, and the Mutiny Bill, before Easter. Under such circumstances I trust that the House will permit us on Tuesday next to take the Orders of the day before the notices of Motions. I do not think without such an arrangement we can accomplish the results we desire; and I trust also that hon. Gentlemen will forbear at this moment from discussing those Estimates. Of course it is not our wish, and were it our wish, I trust it never will be in our power, to curtail in any degree the privilege of discussion which exists in this House; but if the House should consent to the course I propose, and which is one that has been before adopted under similar circumstances—if the House will permit us to take a Vote on account for the great services, my right hon. Friends will in that case postpone their exposition of the conditions of those services until the Estimates are regularly brought forward. Hon. Gentlemen will then have the opportunity of proposing their Motions which are on the paper, and which, of course, it will be their duty to bring forward. If the House will consent to those proposals on our part, I calculate that our Ways and Means Bill can be introduced on Wednesday next. But with the utmost forbearance of the House, and availing ourselves of every opportunity, we cannot hope to pass that measure and the Mutiny Bill until the end of the month. I hope that the suggestions I have made will be acceptable to the House, and that it will allow us in Supply to obtain a supplementary Vote for the militia, and also to take Votes on account for the Army and Navy. With the assistance and permission of the House to take on Tuesdays the Orders of the day before the notices of Motion, we shall be able to accomplish before Easter the passing of those measures that are absolutely necessary for the public service. I now, Sir, take the liberty of moving that the House at its rising do adjourn until Monday next.

MR. NEWDEGATE

Sir, I wish to make an appeal to the noble Lord the Member for London in reference to an important measure he has placed on the papers of the House for Wednesday next. Wednesday is the day fixed by Her Majesty for her levee, and it will be the first opportunity that many hon. Members of this House will have of paying their respects to their Sovereign. I find, also, that several other hon. and learned Members will be obliged to absent themselves in order to go on circuit. It will, therefore, be most inconvenient to have the question of the admission of Jews to Parliament discussed on that day. I am sure that the House will also feel that the elevations which have recently taken place in the persons of the present Lord Chancellor of England and the Lord Chancellor of Ireland will likewise render it most inconvenient to have such a discussion as that proposed by the noble Lord taken on Wednesday next. If, however, it should still be the determination of the noble Lord to persevere with his Motion on Wednesday next, I will certainly move the exclusion of the fifth and following clauses of the Bill, which propose to admit the members of the Jewish faith, and others not Christians, into this House, as it is my intention to take the same course which the noble and learned Lord on the woolsack proposed to take had he remained a Member of this House, and not been elevated to the other House, which he is so well calculated to adorn. I hope the noble Lord will be induced to accede to my appeal, and that he will excuse me giving him this notice.

MR. W. EWART

said, he wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he considered that the proposition for taking the Orders of the Day before the Notices of Motion on Tuesday next would have the effect of preventing those Notices of Motion from being brought forward on that day.

MR. WALPOLE

The object of my right hon. Friend in proposing to give the Orders of the Day precedence on Tuesday next, is merely to facilitate the course of public business. The proceedings in relation to the Orders of the Day will probably be very short, so that the Notices of Motion may afterwards come on.

MR. RICH

said, the House had heard with great satisfaction the statement of the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer with regard to the termination of the unpleasantness between this country and our great Ally the Emperor of the French; but, at the same time, he thought that it would have been more satisfactory, both to that House and to the country, and in accordance with the usages of Parliament, if the right hon. Gentleman had availed himself of the opportunity to have made some statement of the general principle upon which the Administration, which had been formed under such peculiar circumstances, intended to carry on the Government. He had informed the House that he should ask for Votes of money on account, and that afterwards the heads of Departments would state their views upon the different services; but the country wanted something more than this —it had a right to know what general course of policy the Government intended to pursue. This position required no enforcement: and he had no doubt that the right hon. Gentleman would thank him for having given him an opportunity of making such a statement.

MR. P. O'BRIEN

said that, as a Member of a body not connected with either the past or present Government, he wished to elicit some explanation as to what was to be the policy of Her Majesty's present Administration. He was the more anxious for such an explanation from the addresses he had recently read of various Members of Her Majesty's Government. Different statements had been made at Stamford and in East Suffolk; and before giving the Government money to enable it to tide over until next February, he thought that those hon. Members who were not looking for the loaves and fishes had a right to ask the right hon. Gentleman which of those statements represented the views of the Government, and whether, indeed, the Ministry had got a policy at all. He had more than once heard the right hon. Gentleman say of previous Ministries— "They are a miserable Government; they have no connecting link; they are endeavouring to drivel on from day to day, and they have done so without a policy." He wished to know what was to be the policy of the present Government with regard to the question of Reform; whether it was to be that of the Attorney General, who would disfranchise all the boroughs in England, and place all power in the hands of the territorial aristocracy. The present Ministry came in upon the grand cry of opposition to the Conspiracy Bill; and they had heard some of the Members of the Government, when opposing the measures of the late Ministry, express their opinions strongly in one direction; but afterwards they found the noble Earl, the British lion now at the head of the Cabinet, expressing himself in such a manner as almost to identify himself with the French army, while taking exceptions to the language of a few of their colonels, He wished to be informed whether the right hon. Gentleman who had been placed at the head of the Department of Public Education concurred in opinion with the First Lord of the Admiralty (Sir J. Pakington), or with the President of the Board of Trade (Mr. Henley). He should also like to know whether there had been an)' change in the views of the hon. and learned Gentleman who had been made Judge Advocate, and who, in the division upon the Conspiracy Bill, had voted in the minority. What were the views of the Government on the subject of church rates, and how far the noble Lord the Member for North Leicestershire (Lord John Manners) would support his colleagues in a measure for their abolition? Again, there was the question of National Education in Ireland; it was there confidently expected that the day was come when that system established by the Earl of Derby was to be abolished. He also desired to ask the Government what they intended to do with respect to the question of tenant-right. Did they mean to accept what the Earl of Derby had called the Communist Bill of the present Lord Chancellor of Ireland? It was all very well for individual Members of the Government to make different, and even contradictory statements to their constituents, for one to say one tiling in Norfolk or Suffolk, and another to say something else in Buckinghamshire—where, perhaps, Jewish influence had been used for the return of an influential Member of the Administration; but the Members of that House and the country at large were entitled to know upon what principles the management of affairs was to be conducted. In Ireland, when a man said one thing and meant another, the people exclaimed, "Oh, it is policy." He did not know whether that was the kind of policy which the Government intended to pursue; but, at all events, they were bound, before asking the House to vote their money, to make a full and complete statement of their intentions.