SUPPLY—CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES. (Hansard, 17 April 1863)

§ LORD ROBERT CECIL
said, he wished to ask whether the right hon. Baronet the Home Secretary thought that that was a proper hour of the night for going on with Votes in Supply. He (Lord Robert Cecil) was of opinion that the Government should exhibit some forbearance in respect to the hour of going into Supply on Friday night. The Motion for Supply on that night was originally intended to be a nominal one, so as to afford private Members an opportunity of bringing forward questions in which they took an interest. If, however, the Government were determined to change a nominal into a real Motion, private Members would be placed in a most disadvantageous position. In consequence of the number of Motions made on the Motion for going into Committee of Supply, it was impossible to bring on a Motion in reference to Supply itself. Such a Motion, he confessed, he should consider fair at that time—namely, one to refer the Estimates lo a Select Committee for examination, considering the enormous increase they exhibited above those of previous years; but he was precluded from doing so by the device of taking Supply on Friday night. Under existing circumstances, he should move that the Chairman do report progress.

§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTON
I think the noble Lord overstates the matter in saying that it was agreed there should be no Supply asked for on Friday nights. It is only eleven o'clock now. I do not think it has advanced beyond the hour at which it is reasonable for us to proceed.

§ MR. BAILLIE COCHRANE
said, there had existed a general impression among hon. Members that Supply would not be brought on that night, and he believed it had never been intended to go into Supply on Friday nights.

§ MR. W. WILLIAMS
said, he agreed with what had been said on this subject by the noble Lord the Member for Stamford, and hoped that the Government would not press on Supply. The inconvenience would never be remedied until the House agreed to devote an entire night once a week to Supply.

§ MR. BENTINCK
said, he would not go so far as to assert that there had been a distinct agreement on the subject; but when the arrangement was made for putting down Supply instead of the Motion for Adjournment, on Friday nights, he for one, understood that no Votes were to be gone into. There was another ground for not going into Supply on Friday—namely, that it would be impossible for any hon. Member to calculate at what hour the Speaker would leave the chair, and, consequently, that any hon. Member who wished to take part in a discussion on the Votes would have to remain in the House during the whole of the evening and night.

§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTON
The inconvenience which the hon. Member has just mentioned is one that occurs every night on which Supply is put down, because it is competent to every hon. Member to make any Motion he may wish to bring forward on the question that the Speaker leave the chair, and, consequently, no man can tell when Supply will come on. That happens perpetually. If the House will agree that on Mondays and Thursdays no Amendment shall be moved oil the Motion to go into Supply, but that the Speaker shall leave the chair at once, then we might give up Supply on Friday nights; but I should not be disposed to agree to such an arrangement, because I think it would be an infringement on the privileges of the House. We do not wish to do anything disagreeable; and if it be the opinion of the House that we should not go into Supply at this hour, we are perfectly ready to report progress.