HC Deb 04 June 1866 vol 183 cc1794-7
LORD ELCHO

I wish, Sir, to repeat the question which I put to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer on Friday night last—namely. Whether, in the event of the Amendment of the hon. Member for Wells (Captain Hayter) being rejected it is the intention of the Government to proceed with the United Bill, consisting of the Franchise Bill and the Bill for the Re-distribution of Seats, now before the House, and to endeavour with their whole power to carry it through Parliament during the present Session?

MR. HADFIELD

I also wish to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether he has received any notice from the hon. and gallant Member for Wells to the effect that he does not intend to proceed to a division on his Amendment, but to withdraw it?

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

Sir, in answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, I have to reply that I have not had the honour of receiving any communication whatever, either officially or unofficially, from my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Wells respecting his Amendment. With reference to the question of my noble Friend, I can quite understand that he repeats this inquiry—though he is very unobservant of the forms of the House—upon the grounds which he alleged on Friday night—namely, the rumours which are in circulation to the effect that the Government have formed the intention of abandoning the united Bill in the event of the rejection of the Amendment of the hon. and gallant Member for Wells. I understand my noble Friend to ask me whether there is any foundation for those rumours. Her Majesty's Government have neither said nor done anything whatever to constitute a foundation for such rumours or to warrant their circulation; and they have formed no intention of abandoning the Bill. As to anything beyond that, and our proceedings in later portions of the Session, of course those are matters which can easily be made the subjects of a specific inquiry. At the present moment—because in political struggles of this kind they are the proximate steps to be taken—they can hardly be made the subject of immediate consideration; and we must be guided by the demands of public interests and the circumstances of the time as we proceed.

MR. HADFIELD

I beg to ask the hon. and gallant Member for Wells, whether he intends to proceed to a division with his Amendment?

SIR HUGH CAIRNS

Although we have no right to ask for any fresh explanations, I may, perhaps, be allowed to ask, whether the Government intend to adhere to the resolutions already announced—namely, that they will not advise the Crown to prorogue Parliament till the Bill be either rejected by the House or passed through it?

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

Considering the question which is now proceeding, and the nature of the issue which has been raised, which involves at once the fate of the Government and the fate of the Bill upon the moment of decision, and considering the answer I have given to my noble Friend, I do not think I ought to make any further reply.

CAPTAIN HAYTER

I hope, Sir, as the mover of the Amendment before the House, I may be allowed to say that, as far as my intention is concerned, it is impossible for me to arrive at any decision till we receive the statement of the leader of Her Majesty's Government in this House, which we shall probably have at a later period of the evening.

SIR THOMAS BATESON

I wish to ask the hon. and gallant Member for Wells, whether any communication has been made to him either directly or indirectly, intimating, that in the event of the Government getting a majority on the Amendment, there will be any manipulation of the Bill for the Re-distribution of Seats, or any re-arrangement which may make things more comfortable for Members?

CAPTAIN HAYTER

No, most certainly not.

MR. HORSMAN

Sir, I want to ask a very short, and to repeat a very distinct question which was made not long ago to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in reference to the House going into Committee on the Reform Bills. The question was put by the hon. Member for Brighton (Mr. White) in order that the House might fully understand its position. The hon. Member for Brighton said— I want, before we go into Committee, to know the terms upon which we shall go into Committee, that we may clearly understand our position. I therefore ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer this distinct question,—Do we go into Committee with the Government abiding by their pledge—to stand or fall by the Bill they have introduced? The Chancellor of the Exchequer replied— What I mean by standing or falling is this, as long as the Bill stands we stand, when the Bill falls we fall. Now, I wish to repeat the question of the hon. Member for Brighton.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

I apprehend, Sir, that if the Government give to the House an expression of their intentions and determination of a very definite nature, and if the Government subsequently alter or modify this determination, it is their duty to themselves to come down to the House and make known this change in their intentions. That I apprehend to be absolutely required by the first elements of their obligations to this branch of the Legislature. Clearly, therefore, if we had changed from the declaration which we made to the House we should be the parties to declare it, and in order to do so we should not have waited for a question of the nature put by my right hon. Friend.