§ MR. BAILLIE COCHRANEsaid, with respect to the Business of the House, he understood the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government, that though there was no Supply down for tomorrow, the ordinary Motion for Adjournment would be made to-morrow, with the laudable object of allowing hon. Members, who had Notices on the Paper an opportunity of bringing them forward. He now heard that there was to be no adjournment to be moved tomorrow, but that the House would sit on Saturday. He wished to know, in that case, in what form he could bring before the House to-morrow the Question which stood in his name?
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, his hon. Friend was quite right in saying that as it would be necessary for the House to sit on Saturday, it would not be possible to afford that opportunity for the Motions of hon. Members which they had anticipated by means of the Motion for the Adjournment. He was, however, going to propose that the House should meet to-morrow at 2, and re-assemble at 9, as usual on Fridays; and the Government would not put down any Order of the Day that would interfere with the Notices of Motion to which reference had been made by his hon. Friend; so that the list would be kept as open for them, he trusted, as it would have been had there been the ordinary opportunity for moving the adjournment. If further Orders should be put down of a nature to interpose a serious obstacle to the bringing forward of his hon. Friend's Motion, he thought it would be right to move that those Orders of the Day be postponed until after the Notices of Motion were taken.
§ MR. BAILLIE COCHRANEsaid, in that case he should bring forward his Motion to-morrow.
§ MR. NEWDEGATEexpressed a hope that the recommendations of the Committee of 1861, in reference to this subject, would be observed, and that the Prime Minister would allow the Adjournment of the House to be moved tomorrow, so that hon. Members might have the opportunity they desired of bringing forward their Motions.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, he had really no power to put down anything upon 1336 the Paper on Supply, as Supply was closed on the introduction of the Appropriation Act.
§ MR. BAILLIE COCHRANEpresumed there would be no such thing as a "Count-out" to-morrow night.
§ In reply to Lord ELCHO,
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, that tomorrow he hoped to be able to inform the House with regard to the new constitution of the South Kensington Museum. With reference to the business for Friday, this was how the matter stood. To-night the First Orders were the Duke of Edinburgh's Annuity Bill and the Appropriation Bill. He did not anticipate that the first would tend to a prolonged debate; but on the Appropriation Bill a Notice had been given by the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Sclater-Booth) which would lead to some discussion. It was possible, therefore, that these two would make such a considerable aggression on the time for the Indian Budget as to make it difficult to finish that subject to-night. It would be recollected that the Government promised the hon. Member for Sheffield (Mr. Mundella) Wednesday for the debate on the Factory Acts Amendment Bill; but, unfortunately, he only obtained about an hour and a half of that day. He therefore felt that his hon. Friend had a first claim on the Government; and if he were disposed to make that claim—a point on which he had not had an opportunity of communicating with his hon. Friend—his Bill would be put down for 2 o'clock. In the event of his not making it, Friday would be available for the continuation of the debate on the Indian Budget, if it were not concluded to-night. Should the hon. Member for Sheffield go on with his Bill, there would be some hours available on Saturday. [A laugh.] The hon. Gentleman who laughed was jocose; but he (Mr. Gladstone) could not make time. He wished it were in his power to do so. It would save an infinity of trouble, and some needless interruptions, which might well be dispensed with. On Monday the right hon. Baronet opposite (Sir Charles Adderley) would have precedence.
§ LORD ELCHOsaid, it was unusual to make such a concession as the right hon. 1337 Gentleman proposed to make to the hon. Member for Sheffield, and he wished to know whether it was a personal favour to one Member, or whether the Government meant to support the Bill of the hon. Gentleman?
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, the Government had formed no opinion as to the measure of the hon. Gentleman, nor was any personal favour intended, but only the fulfilment of a pledge which had not been fully redeemed by the partial debate of yesterday.
§ MR. BOUVERIEreminded the Government that on Friday, Orders of the Day had precedence over Notices of Motions, so that the hon. Member for Sheffield, without any engagement on the part of the Government, might by the Rules of the House bring on his Bill to-morrow evening if he chose to do so. Remembering, however, that the Bill was now a debating club question, and not a practical question, he hoped the hon. Member would allow Motions to have precedence of it.
§ MR. FAWCETTasked whether he was to understand that the Indian Budget would be divided into three ships, beginning to-night, continued tomorrow after the Bill of the hon. Member for Sheffield, and concluded on Saturday, and that the hon. Member for Sheffield, if he wished it, would have precedence of the Indian Budget to-morrow?
MR. GLADSTONEanswered in the affirmative. He hoped that Parliament would be prorogued on Tuesday, and he wished to divide the interval in the manner most convenient to the House.
§ MR. FAWCETTgave Notice that upon one of the stages of the Appropriation Bill he should call attention to the way in which the Government managed its Business.