IV.—LEGISLATIVE POWER.

HC Deb 31 July 1877 vol 236 cc257-301

Clause 16 (Constitution of Parliament), agreed to.

Clause 17 (Privileges, &c, of Houses).

On this clause, which provides that— The privileges, immunities, and powers to be held, enjoyed, and exercised by the Legislative Council and by the House of Assembly and by the members thereof respectively shall be such as are from time to time defined by Act of the Union Parliament, but so that the same shall never exceed those for the time being held, enjoyed, and exercised by the Commons House of Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and by the members thereof.

Mr. COURTNEY and Mr. PARNELL

moved verbal Amendments, which were negatived.

MR. J. LOWTHER

moved to omit the words "for the time being," in order to insert "at the time of the passing of such Act." The object of the Amendment, he stated, was to define the powers of the Assembly, as existing at the present moment, and so as to prevent them from being from time to 'time varied as alterations might take place in the British Legislature.

After a few words from Mr. E. JENKINS and Sir GEORGE CAMPBELL,

MR. J. LOWTHER

explained that the clause as it stood would expose the Colonies to the same danger as Canada had experienced, which it had been necessary to provide for by a special Act.

MR. BUTT

said the best thing to do was to give the Colonial Legislatures the powers which the two Houses of Parliament possessed at the time the Act was passed.

MR. CHILDERS

said, the clause now before the Committee had been copied from the Act dealing with the Victoria Legislature, and it would be better to retain it. If the Parliament of this country should afterwards increase its powers, a general Act might be passed extending those powers to the Colonial Legislatures.

MR. COURTNEY

was surprised to hear that the hon. and learned Member for Limerick (Mr. Butt) should wish to restrict the powers of the local Parliament. The question was, whether that Legislature should start with limited functions, or should gradually acquire wider and wider duties like our own. It was not desirable that 50 years hence a quasi-antiquarian research into its power should be necessary.

After some further discussion, Question put—

Amendment agreed to.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 18 (First session of Parliament).

The clause enacts that "the Union Parliament shall be called together not later than twelve months after the Union."

MR. O'DONNELL

moved an Amendment, to leave out "twelve" and insert "six."

After a short discussion, in which Mr. LOWTHER, Mr. O'DONNELL, Mr. HERMON, and Mr. PARNELL took part,

Amendment negatived.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 19 (Yearly session of the Parliament).

MR. J. LOWTHER

said, he proposed to strike out the clause. He wished to omit this and a number of other clauses, because it was desirable to exclude from the Bill mere matters of machinery that might, after consultation with the local authorities, be more conveniently dealt with by Order in Council.

MR. O'DONNELL

thought the clause ought to be retained, but was of opinion that eight, instead of 12 months, should be the interval between the sitting of one Parliament and another.

Mr. PARNELL and Captain NOLAN

spoke in favour of retaining the clause.

SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFF

pointed out that the too frequent meeting of Parliament was felt to be a grievance rather than otherwise in some of the Colonies, inasmuch as it caused men to be taken away from their occupations more frequently than was convenient.

MR. COURTNEY

thought the clause a most important one. One of the essential principles of Parliamentary government was that the Representatives of the people should meet at least once a year.

MR. W. E. FORSTER

said, he feared that the proposal to strike out the clause was but the natural consequence of the number of Amendments to the Bill which had been placed on the Paper and the opposition with which it had been met. The subject, however, was important, and although he would not oppose the omission of the clause at that stage, he hoped the Government would think the matter over before the Report.

SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL

pointed out that the omission of a number of clauses, as the Government proposed, would have the effect of giving additional powers to the Government. The clauses seemed to have been deemed necessary when the measure was framed, and no sufficient explanation was now given of the reasons for omitting them.

MR. CHILDERS

supported the suggestion of the right hon. Member for Bradford.

After some further discussion,

Question put, "That the Clause as amended stand part of the Bill."

The Committee divided: — Ayes 21; Noes 129: Majority 108.—(Div. List, No. 272.) [A.M.]

AYES—	Barclay, J. W.	Biggar, J. G.
Brogden, A	Brooks, M.	Campbell, Sir G.
Courtney, L. H.	Cowen, J.	Dilke, Sir C. W.
Dillwyn, L. L.	Fawcett, H.	Jenkins, D. J.
Kirk, G. H.	Lawson, Sir W.	Macdonald, A.
Milbank, F. A.	Monk, C. J.	O'Shaughnessy.
Parnell, C. S.	Power, J. O'C.	Smith, E.
Taylor, P. A.
TELLERS—Mr. O'Donnell and Captain Nolan.

Clause struck out.

The Legislative Council.

Clause 20 (Number and constitution of Legislative Council).

The clause enacts that— The Legislative Council shall, subject to the provisions of this Act, consist of such number of Members, representing such divisions of the Union, and being so qualified and appointed, as the Queen may direct.

MR. COURTNEY

said, that a nominated second Chamber in our Colonies had been tried in Canada, and had proved an utter failure, whereas the elective Chamber in the Cape Colony received the respect and had the authority which, if it were any use at all, it should have. He had ventured to suggest a scheme, although in the present state of the debate he could not expect it to be discussed. It was that the Legislature in each division of the Union should elect such number of Members as the Queen might direct, and in the election of such Members of the Legislative Council each Member of the divisional Legislature should have as many votes as there were Members to be elected by that Legislature, and should be entitled to distribute such votes amongst several candidates, or to accumulate them upon any one candidate at his pleasure. The only novelty in this proposal was the cumulative vote; but he apprehended that it would produce a more respected, stable, and suitable Chamber than any other method.

Amendment moved— In page 5, line 8, after "appointed," to leave out "as the Queen may direct," and insert "in the following manner (that is to say): the Legislature of each division of the Union shall elect such number of members as the Queen may direct, and in the election of such members of the Legislative Council each member of the divisional Legislature shall have as many votes as there are members to be elected by that Legislature, and shall be entitled to distribute such votes among several candidates or to accumulate them upon any one candidate, at his pleasure."—(Mr. Courtney.)

MR. J. LOWTHER

said, the Government intended that the question as to whether the Legislative Council was to be nominated or elected, wholly or in part, should be left for future consideration.

MR. COURTNEY

remarked that in the draft Bill which had been sent to the Colonies, it was provided that the Council should consist of such persons as the Queen might direct. His proposal was founded mainly on the scheme for electing the Senate of the United States.

After discussion, Amendment negatived.

MR. W. E. FORSTER

was rather in favour of an elective Upper Chamber, but did not think it was the business of that Committee to settle the point. He proposed to insert instead of the words "so qualified and appointed," the words "and shall be so constituted, as the Queen may direct."

MR. J. LOWTHER

accepted the Amendment. He would not prejudge the question whether this Council should be elected, nominated, or partly elected and partly nominated. The desire of the Government was in that respect to conform to local opinion.

Amendment made.

MR. PARNELL

asked the Government how long they intended to go on with the Bill that night. There were strange rumours circulating in the Lobby, which induced him to ask this question. Were the sitting to be protracted to an unusual length as had been rumoured, great inconvenience would be occasioned. He was himself quite willing to sit as long as might be desired, but he thought that Progress, at all events, ought to be reported at 4 o'clock.

MR. J. LOWTHER

said, the Government were in the hands of the Committee. They did not wish to press the matter beyond what was felt to be desirable. ["Go on! Go on!"] He could not fix a limit, but he believed both sides of the House were anxious to proceed with the Bill. His desire was to proceed with the Bill and to conclude it. [Cheers.] The principles of the Bill had been thoroughly discussed and accepted, and he thought that if a little forbearance were exercised, real progress might be made.

MR. PARNELL

moved to report Progress.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."— (Mr. Parnell.)

MR. W. E. FORSTER

hoped the Bill would be proceeded with.

MR. DILLWYN

thought the request of the hon. Member for Meath a very reasonable one. He thought there should be some limit of time at which the consideration of the Bill in Committee that night should end. He hoped the Committee would not go on longer than another hour.

SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT

hoped the Government would persevere.

MR. NEWDEGATE

said, it appeared that things had come to this pass—that four Members declared that they would coerce the House—

MR. GRAY

rose to Order.

THE CHAIRMAN

said the hon. Member for North Warwickshire was quite in Order.

MR. NEWDEGATE

said, as long as the Government wished to proceed with the Bill, the House should be prepared to support them.

MR. FAWCETT

hoped the Government would pause in the course on which they were evidently embarking. Rumours had been circulating in the Lobby that evening which had given him great pain. Before it was known whether the consideration of the Bill was to be conducted in a business-like fashion or not, it was rumoured in the Lobbies that the Government were determined to keep a House till 8 in the morning, or perhaps continuously, till 6 to-morrow evening, and for this purpose intended to adopt the perfectly unconstitutional plan, as it seemed to him, of bringing down relays of Members. Now, no one could say that the discussion during the last hour and a half had not been of a most important and business-like character. [Cries of "No, no!" and "Hear, hear!"] He believed the hon. Member for Meath was willing to withdraw his Motion on the understanding that Progress should be reported about 2 o'clock. If the Government kept a House all night, it would not be only with three or four Members they would have to deal. Meanwhile, he would advise the hon. Member for Meath to withdraw his Motion, and not renew it till 2, or a quarter-past 2, when it would be seen what the intentions of the Government really were. [Cries of dissent from the Government benches.]

MR. BIRLEY

hoped the Committee would not listen to the arguments of the hon. Member for Hackney. Forbearance had already been carried to the utmost limits, and it was necessary for those who wished to get on with the business to show that their resolution was as strong as that of the small knot of obstructive. He advised the Government to persevere with the Sitting until they had passed the Bill through Committee. Such a course was due to their own dignity. The Government ought to be supported.

CAPTAIN NOLAN

concurred in the suggestion of the hon. Member for Hackney.

MR. PARNELL

said, he was very happy to take the advice of the hon. Member for Hackney. He begged leave to withdraw his Motion, which he said he would not move again till 2 o'clock.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

MR. O'DONNELL

moved, in line 9, after "direct," to insert— Provided always, That the number of members from each province or dominion shall he fairly and, as exactly as possible, proportionate to the total population of such province or dominion.

After a few words from Mr. W. E. FORSTER,

Amendment negatived.

Clause agreed to.

Clauses 21 to 24, inclusive, struck out.

Clause 25 (Constitution of House of Assembly).

Amendment proposed, At the end of the Clause, to add the words "Provided always, That, in the apportionment of members, and in the determination of the qualifications of electors and members, provision shall be made for the due representation of the natives in the Union Parliament and in the Provincial Councils, in such manner as shall be deemed by Her Majesty without danger to the stability of the Government."—(Mr. James Lowther.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there added."

MR. COURTNEY

opposed the Amendment of the hon. Member, considering that the Amendment of which he had himself given Notice was simpler and more effective.

MR. E. JENKINS

supported the Amendment, but regretted that the Bill did not comprise a complete scheme for the political enfranchisement of the Native races.

MR. W. E. FORSTER

supported the Proviso, and said that the best course would be to leave the arrangement to be carried out by Lord Carnarvon, who had always shown himself considerate of the rights of the Natives.

MR. COURTNEY

then moved his Amendment.

Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment, To leave out from the second word "members," to the end thereof, in order to add the words "no discrimination shall be made of race or of colour in respect of members or of electors."—(Mr. Courtney.)

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the proposed Amendment."

The Committee divided:—Ayes 147; Noes 20: Majority 127. — (Div. List, No. 273.) [A. M. 2.0.]

NOES —	Anderson, G.	Ashley, hn. E. M.
Barran, J.	Bell, I. L.	Biggar, J. G.
Brogden, A.	Colman, J. J.	Dillwyn, L. L.
Earp, T.	Fawcett, H.	Gray, E. D.
Harrison, C.	Jenkins, D. J.	Kirk, G. H.
Lawson, Sir W.	Nolan, Captain	O'Donnell F. H.
Power, J. O'C.	Smith, E.	Taylor, P. A.
TELLERS—Mr. Courtney and Mr. Parnell.

Amendment (Mr. J. Lowther) agreed to.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

The House of Assembly.

Clause 26 (Summoning of House of Assembly).

MR. GRAY

moved to report Progress.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress," and ask leave to sit again." — (Mr. Gray.) [A.M. 2.15.]

The Motion being received with general and continued cries of disapprobation—

MR. J. LOWTHER,

in refusing assent to the Motion, urged the Committee to proceed with the consideration of the remaining clauses. The Amendments of which Notice had been given were not of importance, and would not lead to long discussion. It was important that the Bill should be passed, and a little perseverance at the present moment would save hon. Members a great inconvenience, and he trusted he should not be thought wanting either in courtesy or candour if he added that the Government would not feel that they had discharged their duty until they had afforded the Committee an opportunity of concluding their labours during the present sitting. [Cheers.]

CAPTAIN NOLAN

said, he had no desire to thwart the Government, or to put hon. Members to inconvenience, but he thought the Committee had sat as long as it was possible to give due attention to Business; but he desired to have an assurance from the Government at what hour they would consent to report Progress ["No, no!"] Well, he asked, would they consent to report Progress when daylight arrived? [Cries of "Oh, oh!"]

MR. COURTNEY

said, it seemed they were going to have another scene. It was reasonable that they should have some limit to the Sitting of the Committee. Would the Government consent to report Progress at the 40th clause which completed the provisions of the Bill, as regarded the general Government of the Union? ["No, no!"]

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

The question is one, not for the Government, but for the Committee. Hon. Members must bear in mind the manner in which the patience of the Committee has been tried. The Government proposed to strike Clause 4 out of the Bill. Two or three hours were spent in discussing the proposal, the object of the omission being the same as was aimed at by the Amendments. Then certain hon. Gentlemen challenged the Attorney General on points of International Law, and nearly three hours were spent before we got that matter settled. If hon. Gentlemen had got up at the beginning of the evening and had said— "We will fix the portions of the Bill which we will get through to-night," the Government might, perhaps, have made some arrangement of the kind. But it is past that now, and we can agree to no other terms except that we will sit here until we finish the Bill. [Loud cheers.]

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

said, the right hon. Baronet had again charged hon. Members on that side with being responsible for the delay. He would remind the right hon. Gentleman that his accusation had not a shadow of foundation. Referring to the rumours said to be circulating in the Lobby, the hon. Member was understood to say that he did not hesitate to say that the Government had accepted the odium of the conspiracy which had been got up by Members of the Party opposite, for the purpose of crushing the Irish Members. ["Order, order!"]

THE CHAIRMAN

The word "conspiracy" must be withdrawn. [Cheers.]

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

attempted to proceed, when—

SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT

said: Sir, I rise to Order, and to ask you, whether the word "conspiracy," used in any sense whatever, is a proper term to be applied to the House of Commons?

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

I did not apply—[ "Oh, oh!"]

SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT

I know the habit of denying words which are in the hearing of hon. Members. I say that the word "conspiracy" has been applied to Members of the House of Commons by one who is a Member of the House of Commons; and I hope, Sir, you will insist that the word shall be withdrawn by that Member unconditionally.

THE CHAIRMAN

I have already called upon the hon. Member to withdraw the word, and I think he will see he must withdraw it before he proceeds with his remarks.

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

I have only to ask—[Loud cries of "Withdraw!"] I did not accuse the Government of conspiracy, but I said that they had been accused of it. ["Oh, oh!"]

THE CHAIRMAN

I again call upon the hon. Member to withdraw the word he has used. It will be open to him to offer any explanation afterwards.

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

I perfectly understand you now, and what I say is this—[Cries of "Withdraw!"] If I used the word conspiracy—[Loud expressions of dissatisfaction.]

THE CHAIRMAN

again required the hon. Member to withdraw the expression.

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

If I did use the term, I withdraw it. ["Oh, oh!"]

[This indirect disavowal of the expression alleged to have been used excited general and continued dissatisfaction. Theories of "Withdraw," and expressions of disapprobation were such as to drown the various attempts made by the hon. Member for Mayo (as was understood) to question the fact of his having used the expression attributed to him, or to explain the sense in which he intended to be understood.]

SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT

The hon. Member has no right to say "If I did use the term." [Cheers.] We all know that he used it. We all heard it with our own ears. [Cheers.]

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

Not as applied to—[Cries of "Order!" "Withdraw!"]

SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT,

again rising, Mr. PARNELI exclaimed "Sit down!"

SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT

I ask you, Sir, whether any hon. Member has a right to order me to sit down? If the hon. Member for Meath repeats that expression I shall ask you to call him to Order. I say quite calmly that every Member in this House heard the hon. Member for Mayo apply the word "conspiracy" to Members of this House. ["No, no!"] Well, the hon. Member's ears must be very differently constructed from those of other Members of the House. Every Member, except the hon. Member for Meath, heard the hon. Member for Mayo charge Members of this House with conspiracy, and I hope that the Committee will, without condition or qualification, insist upon the hon. Member for Mayo withdrawing that word. [Cheers.]

MR. COURTNEY

said, there was no doubt that the word "conspiracy" was used; but he understood the hon. Member for Mayo to say that the Government had suffered themselves to rest under the odium of a conspiracy. ["No, no!"]

THE CHAIRMAN

I think I am justified, after what has been said, and by the evidence of my own senses, in once again calling on the hon. Member for Mayo to unreservedly withdraw the word "conspiracy." I shall call upon him to take that step, and I shall expect him to rise in his place to do so. If he does not do so, I must ask the Committee to act on the Resolution which has been recently adopted.

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

I withdraw the expression. I would have done so a while ago if I could have clearly understood what the Chairman has now established by his ruling. ["Oh!"] What I said, or intended to say, was that the Government were content to rest under the odium of the charge of conspiracy which was openly preferred against them in the Lobby. Until you convinced me to the contrary, I did not believe that I had used the word irregularly. The hon. Member went on to support the Motion for reporting Progress, amid continued cries of dissatisfaction, and declared that, if the Government were determined to use their power to put down freedom of discussion, he and those who acted with him would exert their privileges to the utmost in order to defeat those parts of the measure to which they were conscientiously opposed.

MR. W. E. FORSTER

said, he was glad of the determination to which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had come; and for his part, he was prepared to support the Government in carrying on the Bill, so as to finish it at that Sitting. Majorities had rights as well as minorities; and this was an attempt by a minority to override the rights of the majority. He thought he was entitled to say that the time had now come when the majority had a right to insist on enforcing their determination, and so long as the Government were prepared to continue this discussion, and as long as he had strength, he was prepared to support them.

MR. NEWDEGATE

said, that several hon. Members had so strained their privileges as to endanger them, and he thought it his duty, in defence of those privileges, to support the Government in the course they were now taking. The Forms of the House were founded on the assumption that every Member was careful of the honour and dignity of the House, and was prepared to bow to the majority as soon as sufficient time had elapsed to give the country a fair notion of the action of the House. That time, in the present case, had elapsed, and those who now delayed the measure were abusing their privileges and violating the essential principle of the Rules.

MR. BIGGAR

denied that the hon. Members with whom he acted were Obstructionists. ["Oh, oh!"]

MR. KIRK

protested against the charge that in the course they had taken, he and other hon. Members ever intended obstruction. They desired that the clauses of the Bill should be discussed at reasonable hours, and there were precedents to justify them in the course they had adopted.

MR. PARNELL

asked for proof of the charges that had been brought against him. The Speaker had said it was a breach of Order wilfully to obstruct. If he had been guilty of obstruction, why did they not bring forward some distinct instance? The hon. and learned Member for Oxford was a lawyer—["No, no!"]; well, he had always understood so, and he would not have brought such a charge without evidence before the meanest jury in the Three Kingdoms.

SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT

The hon. Member has asked for proofs, and I will give them. In my Profession, however, it is not necessary to prove everything—some facts are so notorious that all tribunals take them for granted, and I believe that the House of Commons will take "judicial notice" of the course pursued by the hon. Member for Meath. There is one thought present in the mind of everyone, and it is this— that some half-a-dozen Members are trying to defeat the House of Commons. The House of Commons has determined not to be defeated [Cheers]:—though I must admit the ingenuity of those who are attempting it, for in fact they have as many aspects as Proteus, sometimes defiant, and sometimes specious. The issue, however, is a very simple one. It is whether the authority of the House is to be degraded in the presence of the English nation. [Cheers.] That is the issue which we are determined to fight, and we will not allow a small minority to wreck this famous Assembly. Whatever sacrifices may be necessary to prevent that great disaster, those sacrifices we are prepared to make. [Cheers.] The people of the country know and care very little for the Forms of the House— those Forms were made at the time when the Members of the House respected it [Cheers]—the English people will look at our conduct, and will determine whether or not the House of Commons is capable of doing the Business of the nation; and if the House will stand by the Government, the Government will stand by the House. As for the hours of discussion, the settlement of that detail is well within the discretion of the House; but the hon. Members for Meath and Cavan go about the country and say—"We will make the House of Commons do its Business at the hours of which we approve." [Cheers.] We tell them that it will do its work when it pleases. [Cheers.] I read a speech delivered by the hon. Member for Meath about a fortnight ago to an assembly of country persons. I will not pledge myself to the accuracy of the report, but he said that his idea of a Parliamentary policy was not a policy of conciliation, but of retaliation. [Cheers.] I am certain that I read words to that effect. [Cheers.]

MR. PARNELL

I must ask you, Sir—if there be a sense of what is right or wrong—whether the hon. and learned Member is in the right to give incorrect versions of what I have said?

THE CHAIRMAN

said, the hon. and learned Member was replying to an appeal of the hon. and learned Member for Meath—but no doubt the discussion was wandering.

SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT

I am sure the hon. Member for Meath is not a man who will repudiate his words. ["Hear, hear!"]

[Mr. NEWDEGATE handed the Manchester Examiner to Sir WILLIAM HARCOURT, who read the passage referred to, as follows—"If they were to have a Parliamentary policy, it must not be one of conciliation but of retaliation."]

SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT

The hon. Member's presence of mind forsook him when he made that speech, and the House will know what to think of his policy. [Loud cheers].

MR. PARNELL

rose—

THE CHAIRMAN

said, the hon. Member had already spoken.

MR. O'DONNELL,

who spoke at great length, defended the "policy of retaliation"—What was there wrong about it? They were only paying the Government back. He spoke for the advanced Party in Ireland, and he said if they could not have "conciliation" they would have "retaliation."

MR. BUTT,

with much warmth: Sir, the hon. Member for Dungarvan has no right to speak in this House on behalf of the Irish Party. He has no right to use on his lips the name of the Irish Party. [Cheers.]

MR. O'DONNELL,

who was encountered with loud cries of dissatisfaction, replied: Sir, what I said was, "I speak for, not the Irish Party, but the most advanced, or, if you please, the most disaffected portion of the Irish Party." [Continued dissatisfaction].

MR. BUTT

I deny that those who act contrary to the pledges given to the Irish Party are members of that Party. I know that the Irish Party repudiate the Member for Dungarvan. I would be false to myself—I would be false to my country—if I did not repudiate him. If I thought he represented the Irish Party and the Irish Party represented my country—but it does not—I would retire from Irish politics as a vulgar brawl, in which no man could take part with advantage or honour to himself. [Loud cheers.]

Question put.

The Committee divided: — Ayes 5; Noes 154: Majority 149.—(Div. List, No. 274.) [A.M. 3.25]

AYES —	Biggar, J. G.	Kirk, G. H.
Nolan, Captain	O'Donnell, F.	Power, J. O'C.
TELLERS—Mr. Gray and Mr. Parnell.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do now leave the Chair."—(Mr. Parnell.)

CAPTAIN NOLAN

hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would now take a more conciliatory course. ["No, no!"] What, he asked, would be the result of carrying on this contest till mid-day? The House would then have to take up Scotch Business which was fixed for that day. ["No, no!"] He remembered that the first Session he sat in that House, a "policy of obstruction" was carried on by a clever young barrister who then sat below the Gangway. That young barrister was the present hon. and learned Member for Oxford.

Sir JAMES M'GAREL-HOGG and Mr. O'CONNSOR, POWER

addressed the House.

MR. GRAY

said, that when he entered the House of Commons a few weeks ago he did so with a feeling of respect for the House; but the Chancellor of the Exchequer had forced him into the position of being considered an Obstructive. The hon. Member for Mayo had been called to Order for using the word "conspiracy." But what were the facts? When he (Mr. Gray) came down to the House yesterday as early as 12 o'clock he was told on the terrace that a conspiracy had been entered into by certain Members. He used the word "conspiracy" on his responsibility as a Member of that House, and he would not withdraw it. ["Order, order!"]

MAJOR DICKSON

moved that the words be taken down.

THE CHAIRMAN

Does the hon. Gentleman withdraw the expression?

MR. GRAY

It is impossible for me to withdraw. I simply stated that I had been told there was a "conspiracy."

THE CHAIRMAN

I must point out to the Committee that the hon. Gentleman said he used the words on his own responsibility. ["Hear, hear!"]

MR. GRAY

I—[Cries of "Order" and "Withdraw!"]

THE CHAIRMAN

Does the hon. Member unreservedly withdraw the word?

MR. GRAY

Certainly, Sir, I withdraw it. The hon. Member went on to say that on entering the House he was told an arrangement had been entered into by hon. Members for sitting in relays during the whole night for the purpose of forcing the Bill through Committee. He expressed astonishment that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had identified himself with that party.

MR. FAWCETT

said, he felt bound to protest against what he, however, knew was the predominant feeling of the House. In consequence of the misconduct of four Irish Members the majority were going to deprive Members like himself of a fair opportunity of expressing their opinions on questions connected with the Bill. Let there be put forward a distinct charge against hon. Members, and if it were proved, no one could more cordially join in condemning them, or in supporting Her Majesty's Government than he would. But the course now pursued was a mistaken one. ["Hear, hear!" and "No, no!"] It was a course which he feared would be fatal to good and fair legislation. For his part, he could but deeply regret the decision at which the Government had arrived, and the course upon which they had entered.

Question put.

The Committee divided: — Ayes 5; Noes 144: Majority 139.—(Div. List, No. 275.) [A.M. 4.0.]

AYES—	Biggar, J. G.	Gray, E. D.
Kirk, G. H.	Nolan, Captain	O'Donnell, F. H.
TELLERS—Mr. Parnell and Mr. O'Connor Power.

[The numbers having been announced, Mr. RAIKES left the Chair, which was taken by Mr. CHILDERS:—It was now 20 minutes past 4 of the clock of Wednesday morning.]

MR. PARNELL

moved the omission of the words "a member" from the Clause.

THE CHAIRMAN

Order! The Question I have to put is that Clause 26 stand part of the Bill?

Question put.

The Committee divided:—Ayes 141; Noes 5: Majority 136. — (Div. List, No. 276.) [A.M.]

NOES —	Biggar, J. G.	Gray, E. D.
Kirk, G. H.	Nolan, Captain	O'Donnell, F. H.
TELLERS—Mr. Parnell and Mr. O'Connor Power.

Clause 27 (Members of Council not to sit in House of Assembly).

MR. J. LOWTHER

moved to strike out the clause.

MR. PARNELL

moved to omit the words — ["Order!"] — "A member." The hon. Member asked whether, according to the ruling of the Chair, he was not entitled to divide, as he believed he was, against every word of the clause?

THE CHAIRMAN

An Amendment must be consistent with sense. (Loud cheers.) I call upon the hon. Member for Meath to show how his Motion is consistent with sense. (Cheers.)

MR. PARNELL

I beg to move, Sir, —(after a pause)—I candidly confess I cannot explain.

THE CHAIRMAN

Then I call upon Mr. O'Donnell, whose name appears next on the Paper.

Mr. O'DONNELL

I beg to move the omission of the word "not."

THE CHAIRMAN

Without explanation I cannot make sense of the Amendment.

MR. O'DONNELL

If the word "not" be omitted, the person referred to in the clause, instead of not being capable of voting, would be capable of voting.

SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT

said, the time was coming when the House would pronounce upon the course of wilful obstruction which had been pursued. [Loud cheers.] The hon. Member for Meath had moved an Amendment which he avowed he could not explain. Whether that was or was not wilful obstruction was a matter which the House would, he hoped, have an opportunity of deciding. For his part, he trusted, they would go on until the English people and the Irish people— for the five or six Members who were obstructing the Public Business could not be considered as representing the people of Ireland—would know what was really meant by the course which was then and had been for some time past adopted. He hoped the Committee would go on steadily step by step, and at least they would have evidence before them on which they could arrive at a righteous verdict.

MR. GRAY

rose to Order, and inquired, whether the observations of the hon. and learned Member were pertinent to the Question before the Committee?

THE CHAIRMAN

said, the observations referred to were entirely pertinent.

SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT

went on to say that the Committee well knew what the meaning of the series of Amendments before them really was. It was this—to defeat the Bill, to prevent the House transacting the Business of the country. He hoped, therefore, the Committee would not condescend to discuss them. [General cheering.]

MR. COURTNEY

said, he had no doubt that the object of the Amendment, whatever it might be, was not to expedite the Public Business; but they were sent there not to pass every measure that might be proposed by a Government, but to consider it and deliberate upon its probable effect. For his part, he protested against the sacrifice of the Business of the House—its character and its dignity—[Ironical cheering]—by the irregular manner in which it was sought to punish four or five Members. Legislation had ceased, deliberation had ceased, and he therefore thought it time for him to withdraw. [The hon. Member left the House.]

LORD FEANCIS HERVEY

remarked that evidence of the obstructive tactics of the five Members opposite was gradually accumulating. ["Hear!"]

CAPTAIN NOLAN

thought the country would consider the quality of the evidence as well as the quantity.

After further disturbed discussion,

MR. BIGGAR

moved to report Progress. [A.M. 4.35.]

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. Biggar.)

Captain NOLAN and Mr. O'DONNELL

supported the Motion; the latter deprecating the display of temper made by Sir William Harcourt, who, he hoped, would not labour longer under the delusion that he was the conscience-keeper of the House, and would not speak more than five times oftener than any other Member.

MR. E. JENKINS

expressed regret that the hon. and gallant Member for Galway (Captain Nolan)—an officer on full pay in Her Majesty's Service— ["Hear, hear!"]—should be found associating himself with a course of obstruction which was utterly unprecedented in the history of Parliament, and which was bringing that House into disrepute in the eyes of the country and throughout Europe. Things intended to reach the Irish people had been said about intimidation; but the House knew by the evidence of their senses the nature of these proceedings, and he hoped that if this course of obstruction continued, Her Majesty's Government and both sides of the House would be prepared to deal with those hon. Members in a manner which would at once vindicate the rights and privileges of the House and assert its dignity. ["Hear, hear!"]

MR. PARNELL,

referring to remarks of the hon. and learned Member for Oxford, denied that he had hitherto pursued a policy of retaliation. His line of action this Session had been in accordance with what was preached in the Sermon on the Mount, for he had returned good for evil. ["Oh!"] He asked, whether any hon. Member could look him in the face and say that he had not done good to their laws that Session? Had he not improved their Prisons Bill? Had it not been left to him to look after the ordinary interests of humanity? The only thanks he had got were the charges which were brought—in a manner which he would not characterize—against him in company with other Members. But he had never expected thanks. He did not value the thanks of that House. He was satisfied with having done his duty, and if his interposition in the debates on the Prisons Bill, and in the debates on the Bill now under consideration, had proved an obstruction, he could only say it was through no fault of his, but was due to circumstances which he could not alter —it was because the House of Commons had been charged with four times as much work as it had any capacity for.

MR. C. B. DENISON

pointed out, as a proof of the obstruction, that the last Amendment moved—which he described as a mere nonsense Amendment—was totally inconsistent with one on the Paper, Notice of which had been given by the same hon. Member himself.

MR. CALLAN

expressed regret that the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. E. Jenkins) should have made a reference in the worst possible taste, and equally ill-intentioned, to the hon. and gallant Member for Galway. That reference came with ill effect from the hon. Member for Dundee, who ought to have remembered that when the agitation of last Autumn was going on, a gallant officer, a friend of the hon. Member's, declared that if we went to war for Turkey he would not draw his sword in her defence.

After a few words from Mr. O'CONNOR POWER,

Question put.

The Committee divided:—Ayes 5; Noes 129: Majority 124. (Div. List, No. 277.) [A.M.]

AYES—	Gray, E. D.	Kirk, G. H.
Nolan, Captain	Parnell, C. S.	Power, J. O'C.
TELLERS—Mr. O'Donnell and Mr. Biggar.

CAPTAIN NOLAN

rose to call the attention of the Chairman to words which had been used to him by the hon. Member for Devonport (Mr. Puleston). The hon. Member, who was sitting on a bench not usually occupied by him, had said that he (Captain Nolan) was guilty of gross impertinence in objecting to his sitting on that side of the House. He wished to know whether the words thus spoken were in Order?

MR. PULESTON

said, that the words attributed to him had been used. He was sitting on the cross benches, and could not avoid the use of those words.

THE CHAIRMAN

said, that the expression was out of Order.

MR. PULESTON

at once withdrew the words.

MR. PARNELL

moved that the Chairman leave the Chair. He would not waste any words on the Motion— it was not worth while.

Motion made, and Question put, "That the Chairman do now leave the Chair."—(Mr. Parnell.)

The Committee divided: — Ayes 5; Noes 130: Majority 125.—(Div. List, No. 278.) [A.M.]

AYES —	Biggar, J. G.	Kirk, G. H.
Nolan, Captain	O'Donnell, F.	Power, J. O'C.
TELLERS—Mr. Parnell and Mr. Gray.

MR. GRAY

moved to report Progress. He said that while physical strength was left to him he would vote against the obstruction which right hon. Members on each of the front benches had placed in the way of himself and those with whom he acted.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."— (Mr. Gray.)

CAPTAIN NOLAN

spoke in support of the Motion.

MR. PARNELL

renewed his protest against the obstruction which Her Majesty's Government had interposed. How, he asked, could simple Irish Members like himself do their duty if they were met with the course of conduct which the Government and their supporters at both sides of the House had adopted? The hon. and learned Member for Oxford, who had great experience in our Courts of Justice, and understood how to plead away a man's life—["Order!"]

THE CHAIRMAN

observed that the language used by the hon. Member was such as ought not to be used.

MR. PARNELL

said he would, of course, and with pleasure, withdraw the observation he had used. He did not use the words in an offensive, but rather in a flattering sense. It was the highest compliment to any criminal lawyer to tell him that he knew how to plead away a man's life, even though that man might be innocent. ["Oh, oh!"] The hon. and learned Member for Oxford, during his career at the Bar, never had a worse case than he had now when he endeavoured to prove a charge of deliberate obstruction against him and other hon. Members. For his own part, he could not understand how Gentlemen in their sober senses could persuade themselves that such a charge had the slightest foundation. He did not believe the English people had those notions of fair play which they boasted so much about. He had always considered that many individuals among the English people were neither more nor less than big bullies, who would bully while they could and while they dared, but who, when they were met with determination and a little more courage than they themselves possessed, shrank from the encounter.

MR. W. E. FORSTER

said, he did not rise to reply to the remarks of the hon. Member for Meath, because everybody must perceive the object with which his speech had been made. [Cheers.] They were engaged in a contest of endurance, and he would make a few remarks on the conduct of the contest. They had really to decide that morning, or to-night, or perhaps tomorrow morning—whether their present Rules would suffice for the management of their proceedings. A few Irish Members had made use of those Rules with the object of endeavouring to prevent this Bill being carried. The Committee were now making use of those Rules in order to secure that the Bill should be carried. The supporters of the Bill were in a large majority, and its opponents were in a small minority. The majority ought not to be defeated, and it would be their own fault if they were. [Cheers.] He could not but think that if 50 hon. Members remained for the purpose of taking part in divisions the other hon. Members present could leave the House to return to it refreshed. The immediate question was, whether a large majority could outlast and out-endure a small minority? If they could not, then the time had arrived when they should re-consider their Rules. He trusted that the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the House would leave the conduct of affairs, for some time at least, in the hands of his Colleagues, and seek the rest which, from his arduous duties and his long attendance in the House, he must so much require. [Cheers.]

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

heartily echoed the sentiments of the right hon. Gentleman, and acknowledged the kindliness which had prompted his remarks. Some of his Colleagues would, no doubt, relieve him for a time from attendance in the House in order that he might husband his strength for the unfortunate contest in which, from no fault of theirs, they found themselves engaged. They were now endeavouring and were determined to resist a systematic policy of obstruction which was commenced, not late in the evening, but at the very commencement of Public Business. Under these circumstances, they had nothing to do but to persevere in their resistance as long as it was necessary to do so. It might be that the Bill before the Committee would last throughout the sitting that day (Wednesday); but if it did, he could assure the Scotch Members that the Government would find a day for the discussion of the Bill which had been fixed for the Wednesday sitting. He would ask hon. Members to be a little chary of rising to Order. They would be quite safe in leaving matters of Order in the hands of the Chairman, and the Chairman might rely upon the support of the House.

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

commented at length on the statement of the right hon. Gentleman, and maintained that the Government were already beaten in this contest, because there had been more time consumed to no purpose than would have been needed to get through the remaining clauses of the Bill.

After further discussion,

Question put.

The Committee divided: — Ayes 5; Noes 118: Majority 113.—(Div. List, No. 279.) [A.M. 6.30.]

AYES —	Biggar, J. G.	Kirk, G. H.
Nolan, Captain	Parnell, C. S.	Power, J. O'C.
TELLERS—Mr. Gray and Mr. O'Donnell.

After this Division, Mr. CHILDERS left the Chair, which was taken by Mr. W. H. SMITH. It was now half after Six of the clock of Wednesday morning.

MR. PARNELL

moved that the Chairman do report Progress, and chal- lenged the conduct of the right hon. Gentleman, who had put the Question when the hon. Member for Louth (Mr. Kirk) was attempting to address the Committee.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."— (Mr. Parnell.)

THE CHAIRMAN

The ruling of the Chairman cannot be challenged.

MR. GRAY

said, it was perfectly competent at any time for an hon. Member to challenge the ruling of the Chairman of a Committee, and the Question was then referred to the Speaker for his decision. It was a serious constitutional question, and he called on the hon. Gentleman who now occupied the Chair to pause.

THE CHAIRMAN

It is in the power of any hon. Member to rise to challenge the decision of the Chair on a point of Order; but if the Chair rules that the hon. Member is not in Order, and that the decision that he has given is correct, then the only course open is to make a Motion to report Progress; and then if the Committee think fit, the Motion is carried and the Speaker is called in. Does the hon. Member for Meath move to report Progress?

MR. PARNELL

said, he desired to challenge the ruling, and it now appeared he was right in doing so.

Question put.

The Committee divided: — Ayes 4; Noes 118: Majority 114.—(Div. List, No. 280.) [A.M.]

AYES—	Kirk, G. H.	Nolan, Captain
O'Donnell, F.	Power, J. O'C.
TELLERS—Mr. Parnell and Mr. Gray.

Question, "That Clause 27 stand part of the Bill," again put.

MR. O'DONNELL

moved that the Chairman should leave the Chair.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do now leave the Chair."—(Mr. O'Donnell.)

MR. C. DENISON

protested in the strongest manner against the systematic course of obstruction which for so many hours had been indulged in.

MR. GRAY

supported the Motion of the hon. Member for Dungarvan, and entered Ms protest against the course pursued by the Government. No doubt the majority might in time succeed in wearing down the seven Irish Members.

An hon. MEMBER

There are only four.

MR. GRAY

said, the others were gone to take rest and refreshments, after the example of the Ministerial tactics. They would soon be back, and then they would rest themselves.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

suggested that it would be a graceful act on the part of the minority to yield. ["No, no!"] He sympathized with the hon. Member for Tipperary, that they were enduring considerable physical distress, and recognized the gallantry with which the struggle had been carried on. But there could be no doubt of the ultimate result, and he thought it would be a good plan to let the Bill pass, on the understanding that the more important Amendments should be considered on the Report.

MR. PARNELL

thought that the Chancellor of the Exchequer's proposal could hardly have been made seriously, and he would find that it was not likely to promote the passage of the Bill. The Government was bringing up its Reserve forces; but so could they. The first mail boat would bring them also from Ireland; and even in London the hon. Member for Cavan (Mr. Biggar) was peacefully asleep, and would soon return like a giant refreshed. He himself hoped soon to be in a similar state of repose.

SIR PATRICK O'BRIEN,

in addressing the House, having made use of some strong expressions, was immediately and peremptorily called to Order by the Chairman.

Question put.

The Committee divided:—Ayes 4; Noes 122: Majority 118.—(Div. List, No. 281.) [A.M. 7.40.]

AYES —	Biggar, J. G.	Gray, E. D.
Kirk, G. H.	Parnell, C. S.
TELLERS—Mr. O'Donnell and Mr. O'Connor Power.

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

moved to report Progress.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."— (Mr. O'Connor Power.) [A.M. 7.40.]

MR. BIGGAR

supported the Motion. He was, he said, the more able to do so, having had a long sleep and a good breakfast.

CAPTAIN NOLAN

supported the Motion at length.

SIR CHARLES RUSSELL,

as an officer holding Her Majesty's commission, disclaimed on the part of officers who were Members of the House, and of officers of the Army who were not Members, any participation in the conduct of the hon. Member who had just spoken. Although that hon. Member was still an officer of the Army on full pay, he was one of the principal leaders of those who systematically obstructed the business of the House.

MR. GRAY

hoped the observations just made would be withdrawn. If they had been made outside the House they might be answered otherwise than they could be in it.

MR. O'DONNELL

protested against the language used by the hon. and gallant Member in respect of the conduct of the hon. and gallant Member for Galway. If there was anything to object to in the conduct of his hon. and gallant Friend, it ought to be brought before the House. Did the Government really mean to go on with the contest of physical endurance to test the Forms of the House? If so, and speaking for himself, he never felt in better training to support a policy of physical endurance.—["Oh!"]

MR. ASSHETON CROSS

said, that this was not a question of the use of the Forms of the House, but the abuse of the Forms of the House. [Cheers.] It was not a question of physical endurance, but of wilful and persistent obstruction; and, sooner or later, it would be judged not by the House alone, but also by the country. [Cheers.]

Question put.

The Committee divided:—Ayes 3; Noes 98: Majority 95. — (Div. List, No. 282.) [A.M. 8.20.]

AYES—	Kirk, G. H.	Nolan, Captain
O'Donnell, F. H.
TELLERS—Mr. Gray and Mr. Biggar.

Mr. W. H. SMITH

here left the Chair, and was succeeded by Sir HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON. It was now twenty minutes after Eight of the clock of Wednesday morning.

MR. KIRK

moved that the Chairman leave the Chair.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do now leave the Chair."—(Mr. Kirk.) [A.M. 8.25.]

MR. BIGGAR

supported the Motion.

CAPTAIN NOLAN

said, that the fact of his being an officer on full pay in Her Majesty's service having been adverted to, he wished to explain that it had no influence on his conduct. He had told his constituency when he canvassed them that it would make no difference in his votes. He had nothing to do with the politics of any other officer, and he was not to be influenced in political matters by any of his brother officers. As a rule he never talked politics with other officers, although on military matters he was, of course, desirous to learn from them. With regard to the present contest, he wished to know where it was to end? Would not the Government make one suggestion in the nature of a compromise?

MR. GRAY

wished to make another appeal. [Several hon. MEMBERS: Quite useless!] He was about to appeal to the second relay of Ministers whom he now saw on the Treasury Bench. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had, it appeared, gone home to seek that needful repose which the Home Secretary had apparently enjoyed. He appealed to the Home Secretary, whose patience had been shown on the Prisons Bill, to say what object was to be gained by prolonging this contest. If the majority of 400 or 500 won a victory, it would not be a moral victory, and they might fail to beat the minority of five or six after all. Was it not the part of the stronger party to make concessions? ["No!"] Well, then, the weaker party—[An hon. MEMBER: Goes to the wall]—must go on vindicating the principle of protecting the rights of minorities. It was known yesterday at 12 o'clock that relays of Members were to be formed to beat the minority of five or six. Was that a position which the Government were prepared to defend? He would ask them to hold out the olive branch to the minority.

MR. O'DONNELL

was proceeding to refer to the conduct of Public Business, and to the necessity of some change in the arrangements of next Session, when—

THE CHAIRMAN

called the hon. Member to Order, and intimated that he was travelling beyond the question before the House.

MR. O'DONNELL

said, that in these frequent Divisions there was no more merit than in a feat of pedestrianism. Would not the Government meet the minority half way, and propose some terms of surrender and fair capitulation, and not call upon them to lay down their arms without some of the honours of war?

SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL

said, that no one was more opposed to legislation after midnight than himself, but they had now got to a reasonable hour in the morning—[it being half after 8 A.M. of Wednesday.] He therefore hoped the Government would go on. He had just come down to look after some Scotch Bills, and had obtained the assurance that a day—and a good day too—would be given for their consideration. He had some Amendments on the Paper on this South Africa Bill, and he for one was now quite ready to go on. [Cheers.]

Question put.

The Committee divided: — Ayes 3; Noes 77: Majority 74.—(Div. List, No. 283.) [A.M. 9.0.]

AYES —	Kirk, G. H.	O'Donnell, F. H.
Power, J. O'C.
TELLERS—Mr. Parnell and Mr. Biggar.
AYES—	Kirk, G. H.	Power, J. O'C.
TELLEES—Mr. Parnell and Mr. Biggar.
AYES —	Kirk, G. H.	Nolan, Captain
Power, J. O'C.	Parnell, C. S.
TELLERS—Mr. O'Donnell and Mr. Biggar.
NOES —	Burt, T.	Kirk, G. H.
Nolan, Captain	O'Conor, D.M.	Power, J. O'C.
Smith, E.
AYES—	Barclay, J. W.	Biggar, J. G.
Brogden, A	Brooks, M.	Campbell, Sir G.
Courtney, L. H.	Cowen, J.	Dilke, Sir C. W.
Dillwyn, L. L.	Fawcett, H.	Jenkins, D. J.
Kirk, G. H.	Lawson, Sir W.	Macdonald, A.
Milbank, F. A.	Monk, C. J.	O'Shaughnessy.
Parnell, C. S.	Power, J. O'C.	Smith, E.
Taylor, P. A.
TELLERS—Mr. O'Donnell and Captain Nolan.
NOES —	Anderson, G.	Ashley, hn. E. M.
Barran, J.	Bell, I. L.	Biggar, J. G.
Brogden, A.	Colman, J. J.	Dillwyn, L. L.
Earp, T.	Fawcett, H.	Gray, E. D.
Harrison, C.	Jenkins, D. J.	Kirk, G. H.
Lawson, Sir W.	Nolan, Captain	O'Donnell F. H.
Power, J. O'C.	Smith, E.	Taylor, P. A.
TELLERS—Mr. Courtney and Mr. Parnell.
AYES —	Biggar, J. G.	Kirk, G. H.
Nolan, Captain	O'Donnell, F.	Power, J. O'C.
TELLERS—Mr. Gray and Mr. Parnell.
AYES—	Biggar, J. G.	Gray, E. D.
Kirk, G. H.	Nolan, Captain	O'Donnell, F. H.
TELLERS—Mr. Parnell and Mr. O'Connor Power.
NOES —	Biggar, J. G.	Gray, E. D.
Kirk, G. H.	Nolan, Captain	O'Donnell, F. H.
TELLERS—Mr. Parnell and Mr. O'Connor Power.
AYES—	Gray, E. D.	Kirk, G. H.
Nolan, Captain	Parnell, C. S.	Power, J. O'C.
TELLERS—Mr. O'Donnell and Mr. Biggar.
AYES —	Biggar, J. G.	Kirk, G. H.
Nolan, Captain	O'Donnell, F.	Power, J. O'C.
TELLERS—Mr. Parnell and Mr. Gray.
AYES —	Biggar, J. G.	Kirk, G. H.
Nolan, Captain	Parnell, C. S.	Power, J. O'C.
TELLERS—Mr. Gray and Mr. O'Donnell.
AYES—	Kirk, G. H.	Nolan, Captain
O'Donnell, F.	Power, J. O'C.
TELLERS—Mr. Parnell and Mr. Gray.
AYES —	Biggar, J. G.	Gray, E. D.
Kirk, G. H.	Parnell, C. S.
TELLERS—Mr. O'Donnell and Mr. O'Connor Power.
AYES—	Kirk, G. H.	Nolan, Captain
O'Donnell, F. H.
TELLERS—Mr. Gray and Mr. Biggar.
AYES —	Biggar, J. G.	Nolan, Captain
O'Donnell, F. H.
TELLERS—Mr. Kirk and Mr. Gray.

Question again proposed, "That Clause 27 stand part of the Bill? "

MR. GRAY

moved to report Progress.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."— (Mr. Gray.)

MR. BIGGAR

supported the Motion on the ground that the great majority of hon. Members present were not in a position to give an intelligent vote upon the Bill.

CAPTAIN NOLAN

urged the Government to give way in their own interest as well as for the sake of Public Business.

MR. O'DONNELL

spoke at some length, and was proceeding to discuss the general question, when he was called to Order by the Chairman. After some further observations, chiefly on the question of physical endurance, the hon. Member again entered into general considerations, whereupon—

THE CHAIRMAN

warned the hon. Member that if he persisted in his line of argument he would be called to Order for the second time.

After further debate,

Question put.

The Committee divided: — Ayes 3; Noes 75: Majority 72.—(Div. List, No. 284.) [A.M.]

AYES— Kirk, G. H. Nolan, Captain O'Donnell, F. H.

TELLERS—Mr. Gray and Mr. Biggar.

Question put, "That Clause 27 stand part of the Bill."

The Committee divided: — Ayes 3; Noes 77: Majority 74.—(Div. List, No. 285.) [A.M. 10.0.]

AYES — Kirk, G. H. Nolan, Captain O'Donnell, F. H.

TELLERS—Mr. Gray and Mr. Biggar.

Clause struck out.

Clause 28 (As to election of Speaker of House of Assembly).

MR. GRAY

moved to report Progress.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."— (Mr. Gray.)

Mr. BIGGAR and Mr. O'DONNELL addressed the House at length.

MR. E. JENKINS,

in answer to an objection of the hon. Member for Dungarvan (Mr. O'Donnell) against legislation by Order in Council, pointed out that in opposing Clause 3 he had advocated that very legislation by Order in Council against which he now protested.

After discussion,

Question put.

The Committee divided:—Ayes 3; Noes 89: Majority 86.—(Div. List, No. 286.) [A.M.]

AYES — Kirk, G. H. Nolan, Captain O'Donnell, F. H.

TELLERS—Mr. Gray and Mr. Biggar.

MR. BIGGAR

then moved that the Chairman leave the Chair, observing that although he might seem to be somewhat persistent in his opposition to the Bill, he was only desirous to make it as perfect as possible.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do now leave the Chair."—(Mr. Biggar.)

MR. O'DONNELL

said, he felt that the conflict ought to come to an end, and he thought that the Government ought to meet them half-way. He did not wish to intrude upon the Committee one moment more than that the exigencies of the debate compelled him, but in reply to the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. E. Jenkins), he had to say that when he objected to anything more being done after the enabling 3rd clause being passed, he did so on the express ground that if the Government were going to do anything by Orders in Council, they now had a complete and full authority, but that if they were going to do it by enactments, then they ought to introduce proper safeguards into those enactments.

MR. GREGORY rose to Order. The hon. Member was addressing himself to the general Question.

THE CHAIRMAN

said, he understood the hon. Member for Dungarvan was replying to the hon. Member for Dundee; but he would remind him that on a question to report Progress a wider discussion would not be relevant.

MR. O'DONNELL

continued. He thought that the Committee ought to meet them half-way. The fact was that the Government were themselves steeped to the very lips in the obstruction with which they charged the Irish Members.

MR. MACDONALD

rose to Order.

THE CHAIRMAN

said, he could not say that the hon. Member was out of Order.

MR. O'DONNELL

said, he observed that the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had now returned to the House. As the right hon. Gentleman had not had the advantage of hearing the arguments he had addressed to the Committee, he would venture to repeat them [which the hon. Member proceeded to do at great length, and to the great dissatisfaction of the Members present.] He was, he said, fully conscious of the absurd position which he occupied; but his action, and that of his hon. Friends, was entirely due to the course which was taken by Government.

SIR ANDREW LUSK

said, he did not rise to waste advice upon hon. Gentlemen below the Gangway, but he wished the Committee would take notice of the situation. Here, after sitting up all night, they were in the same block they were in the night before. The House surely ought to be master of its own proceedings; but the course which had been pursued during the last few days would deprive it of all control over the Public Business, and cut at the root of representative Government altogether. As the representative of a large constituency, and on behalf of the dignity of this great Empire, he protested against the House of Commons being subjected to the dictation of two or three Members, and it would be a disgrace to the House if it was submitted to. The time had, in his opinion, arrived when the passage of the Balkans must be forced, and he begged the Government not to be afraid, for they might rest assured the House and the country would support them. He hoped they would never suffer the House to be placed under a despotism of this kind. If it had been a respectable despotism he should not so much care.

CAPTAIN NOLAN

was sure that if the hon. Baronet had been in the House during the discussion of the previous night, he would admit that the conduct of the Irish Members of whom he complained was not so reprehensible as he seemed to think. The fact was, that they had discussed the clauses of the Bill fairly, and that it was not till 10 minutes past 2 that they had urged that Progress be reported. He suggested that the House should adjourn; and then at 12 o'clock they could meet again and take up the Scotch Business that stood upon the Paper for that day (Wednesday).

MR. GATHORNE HARDY

said, that the hon. and gallant Member for Galway, the leader of a large party of five, had taken upon himself to act as negotiator, not only for the Government, but for the whole mass of the House. The hon. Member had taken a course which would hardly be approved by the House. The power of the House must be called forth in dealing with those Members who had obstructed the Business of the House. What was the position of the House at this moment? The hon. Member for Dungarvan, who told the House that he did not wish to obtrude his observations on the House, about two hours ago proposed an Amendment to the clause under discussion, and the Under Secretary accepted it. Did they put that Amendment to the decision of the Committee? No. The hon. Member for Tipperary (Mr. Gray) moved to report Progress, and the hon. Member for Dungarvan voted for Progress and against his own Amendment. Again, another Motion was made that the Chairman do leave the Chair, and the hon. Member for Dungarvan rose and supported it. And then the House was told that there was no obstruction. [Cheers.] But the country was becoming alive to what was going on, and those Gentlemen would be judged by their acts, and not by their words.

MR. MONK

said, that the memory of the hon. and gallant Member for Galway must be very treacherous, or the statement which the hon. and gallant Member had made was an insult to the intelligence of the House. [Cheers.] The hon. and gallant Member had stated that the hon. Member for Finsbury (Sir Andrew Lusk) was altogether wrong in stating that the Motion for Progress was made at an early hour that morning. Why, that was the very first Motion that was made the moment Mr. Raikes took the Chair. [Cheers.]

CAPTAIN NOLAN

explained that he was absent from the House at the time.

MR. MONK

If that were so he thought it insulting to the House for the hon. and gallant Member, having been absent during the time the Motion was under discussion, to come down and state things of which he knew nothing. The Secretary of State for War had said that this was a matter with which the House must deal. Well, he trusted that hon. Members, whether above the Gangway or below the Gangway, would show what they thought of those who were obstructing the Business of the House, and had obstructed it not only with regard to this Bill, but during the whole Session. [Cheers.]

MR. ANDERSON

said, he had so far taken no part in these debates, but he did wish to say a few words now. He thought no one would accuse him of any laxity in the defence of the rights of pri- vate Members, or of minorities. He had always maintained these rights to the utmost of his power, and had opposed the Government last week in their new Rules, the first of which he had characterized as unnecessary for the purpose intended and dangerous on other accounts, and the second as useless for the purpose of stopping persistent obstruction; and he thought most hon. Members would admit the latter point to be abundantly proved now, when, in spite of the Rule, this obstruction had gone on for nearly 20 hours. If there were any great principle at stake in this contest he could sympathize with it, even if he differed in opinion; but he could see no principle but that of obstruction. For many hours they had had nothing but Motions for Progress, or leaving the Chair, varied by an occasional Amendment that was not serious, but only to make nonsense of the clause. He thought it was more than time for the House to interpose—indeed, five hours ago, he had privately suggested that course to the Home Secretary, and if it was time then, it must be far more so now. The course he thought should be taken was, not under the new but under the old Rules, to report to the House with the view of passing a Vote of Censure on the Members in question. It might be thought by some that that was too mild a course, and that from the spirit hitherto exhibited those hon. Members would disregard a Vote of Censure; but the House would at least have the satisfaction of feeling that it had carried forbearance to its extreme limit, by taking first the mildest of the severe measures in its power, and if that was not effectual he, for one, would not hesitate about suspension; but he did wish to try the milder step first. The powers of the House were abundant for the occasion, and he would urge Government to proceed now to put them in force.

MR. GREGORY

briefly addressed the Committee.

MR. GRAY

said, he would readily accept the responsibility for everything he had said and done. He wished to know what it was that the Government intended to do. The responsibility for the demoralization of the House at the present moment rested with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whose action on Wednesday last was the fons et origo of the whole mischief. He had failed to show strength where strength was wanted. Had he taken strong measures at once, the present state of things could never have been reached. He could understand such a step as a Motion suspending them from their Parliamentary duties, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not the courage to submit such a Motion. Let him proceed on his Resolution—he and his Friends were ready to meet him.

SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT

said, that the hon. Member who had just spoken had taunted and defied the Government and the House to take immediate action against him and the other hon. Members. He would tell the hon. Member that if such action had not been already taken it was not because of the weakness of the House or the Government. [Cheers.] But it was necessary that the proceedings should be taken in the presence of the people of England, of Scotland, and of Ireland. [Cheers.] And this forbearance had been exercised in order that the people of the United Kingdom might understand the character of that condemnation which it would be the business of the House to pronounce. They wished to give those hon. Members rope. [Loud cheers.] They wished it should be seen that no amount of forbearance on the part of the House of Commons had had the smallest effect on the conduct of those hon. Members. The reason why the House had endured so much and would endure still more was, that the true conduct of those Members might be understood and the justice of the House of Commons might be acknowledged. [Cheers.]

MR. PELL

wished to call attention to a statement made by the hon. and gallant Member for Galway, which, as a Member of Parliament and a Gentleman, he ought not to have made. A few minutes ago the hon. and gallant Member addressed the House, and started with an assertion which was inconsistent with fact, and which as a gentleman and Member of Parliament he had no right to make without good reason. The hon. and gallant Member stated that the Motion to report Progress was made at a late hour last evening, or rather at an early hour this morning; he was contradicted by the hon. Member for Gloucester, and what was the hon. and gallant Gentleman's excuse? It was that he was not in the House at the time, and was not aware that the Motion had been made at an early period of the evening. Well, he (Mr. Pell) had himself been long sitting in the House endeavouring to assist in working a machine which was now cutting nothing but chaff, and he begged to tell the hon. and gallant Member that he ought to have ascertained his facts before making such a statement.

CAPTAIN NOLAN

regretted very much that he should have been mistaken in what he had stated. He had been absent from the House until 8 o'clock the previous evening, and he had no idea that a Motion to report Progress had been made in his absence. He apologized for the mistake he had made, but he did not think it deserved the severe animadversion of the hon. Member opposite.

MR. CHARLES LEWIS

said, he did not wonder that those who had not had the advantage of a few hours' rest should be so incapacitated that they were unable to recollect correctly what had passed on the previous night. It could not be repeated too often that the moment the Chairman took the Chair yesterday evening, about a quarter past 5 o'clock, the hon. Member for Dungarvan moved to report Progress. He thought that on the part of the House hon. Members had a right to demand, not only of the Government, but also of the Leader of the Opposition, whom he hoped soon to see in his place, that some definite action would be taken for the purpose of enabling the House of Commons to proceed with the Public Business, which was now being delayed to the greatest possible detriment and injury of the State. If they wanted anything to induce them to come to that determination it was supplied in the daring speech of the hon. Member for Tipperary, and the insulting way in which the Leader of the House had been treated, because he happened to possess an amiable and placid spirit, and had not thought proper to resent, as many of them would have done in a more formal, distinct, and intrepid way the insults which had been cast upon him night after night. [Cheers.] Was it to be said, because the right hon. Gentleman did not rise and show that he possessed a nettled spirit, that he was an unworthy Leader of the House? They did not ask a character either for themselves or their Leaders from such persons as those. [Loud cheers.] To understand what a Leader of the House of Commons must be, a man must have, even though it were only to a small extent, the spirit of a Statesman; to understand what a gentleman should be and should do, he must have a gentlemanly mind. [Loud cheers.] It was vain to expect figs from thistles, and there was no expectation of finding from that quarter of the House to which he referred any appreciation of the kindly, dignified, and forbearing conduct of the Leader of the House of Commons. If the House was to endure these taunts and this mode of proceeding much longer, certain hon. Members must understand that if they wished to be martyrs they would have an opportunity of being such; and he wished them joy of every single admirer of their proceedings, which were nameless among men who had any character and standing.

MR. KNATCHBULL-HUGESSEN

said, it was necessary to treat the crisis at which the House had now arrived with calmness and dignity, and if the Government thought it necessary to take swift and strong action they should have his most cordial and hearty support. No one was more anxious than himself to protect the rights of minorities, in dealing with whom majorities were bound to exercise patience and forbearance; but if there were certain obligations incumbent upon majorities in regard to minorities, there were certain reciprocal obligations upon minorities; and when those obligations were persistently neglected, and the patience and forbearance of the majority were night after night abused, it was time to take action to secure the due performance of Public Business. Appeal after appeal had been made to those qualities which gentlemen ought to possess if they were fit to be Members of that House—to their conscience, their good sense, their good taste, and their good feeling. But appeals had unfortunately been made to conscience where, so far as the Committee could discern, there was no conscience; to good sense—well, he hardly liked to express his opinion of the amount of good sense apparently possessed by those to whom that appeal had been made; and to good taste and good feeling, where those qualities had been conspicuous by their absence. [Cheers.] When time after time a minority, rejecting all considerations of its obligations towards the majority, went on as a small minority had done during the past 20 hours, he thought the time had come for swift and strong action, and the House ought to submit to the degradation no longer. [Cheers.] He wished it to be distinctly understood that, while they on that side of the House felt it to be their mission to protect the rights of a minority and to protect the right of free speech, they were driven and forced by the conduct of the minority on that occasion to join the Government in any action which they might take to prevent the abuse of such rights. He sympathized with minorities which held out upon points of principle and made use of those Forms of the House which existed for the protection of minorities. But whilst even to such action there must be limits, the case was widely different here, where no question of principle was raised, but hour after hour was wasted in discussions upon trivial and useless Amendments and obstructive Motions to report Progress. One Amendment had been moved empowering the Union Parliament to do something before the Union Parliament would be called into existence; and, although this had been pointed out to the Mover, he had persisted in dividing the Committee. Another Gentleman had divided in favour of reporting Progress when his Amendment had actually been accepted by the Government, and the whole procedure of the minority had been one of mere obstruction and delay. The spirit which had actuated minorities during the whole experience of Parliament had been entirely neglected by this minority, and conduct had been persisted in day after day and night after night which made those on his side of the House avow their readiness to support the Government in the strongest measures which they might think it right to propose, in order to show the country that the House of Commons was not to be bullied or intimidated from discharging its duty to its constituents and carrying on the Business of the country.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

I do not wish to say anything in reply to the observations of the hon. Member for Tipperary (Mr. Gray); and, so far as I am individually concerned, I treat those observations with perfect equanimity. But I do feel that I am in a responsible position, holding as I unworthily do the post of Leader of the House, and while I thank most cordially my hon. Friend the Member for Londonderry (Mr. C. Lewis) for the expressions he has used, I feel that I should also thank not only my hon. Friends on this side, but also hon. Gentlemen on the other side of the House, for the very great kindness and forbearance I have experienced at their hands in what I shall venture to call very exceptional and trying circumstances. I do feel it to be of importance that it should not be supposed that through any fault of mine the House has been allowed to get into a false position. My right hon. Friend who has just sat down (Mr. Knatchbull-Hugessen), has said that he and those about him are, in a certain sense, peculiarly guardians of the rights of minorities. But I cannot admit to my right hon. Friend that he and hon. Gentlemen near him are more interested in guarding those rights than I am or than we are. I have always felt during these trying discussions, and have expressed my strong conviction, that it was one of the most sacred duties of this House to be jealous to an extreme in guarding those rights which have for so many years—I may say for centuries— been the great safeguard of the liberties of this country. Sir, the House of Commons has had in former times to contend against many encroachments of different characters. It has done its duty in resisting the encroachments of arbitrary power, and in various ways it has always stood up and done the duty which the country has entrusted to it. But there is no duty more sacred than this duty with regard to ourselves—it is of the utmost importance that we should not allow ourselves, under any sense of provocation however trying, and especially that we should not allow ourselves, under any irritation caused by personal taunts, to forget the duties which we owe to ourselves and to the country, to maintain our attitude and to do whatever we may feel necessary calmly, deliberately, and in an orderly manner. Now, Sir, we have been endeavouring both in the action taken last week with regard to the amendment of some of our Rules, and in the course followed during the last few nights in Committee on this Bill, to keep within the strict Forms of the House in dealing with Gentlemen who have tried its patience to the utmost. We have endeavoured to work on the old lines which have been found sufficient in former years. I greatly fear that that attempt has been found on the present occasion not a successful one, and that it may become necessary to adopt some other course. But if we are forced to do that, it must not be at the moment chosen by those who have been thus far obstructing us—it must be at the moment that we ourselves shall choose. It must be at a moment when the House is as full as can be reasonably expected, and when we have the advantage of the presence of those who have the longest experience in the Business of the House, and whose standing is such as to give weight and authority to what we may do, but whom I do not see at present in their seats. But I would desire once again, with all temperateness, to press upon those Gentlemen who have been so long keeping matters in suspense, whether they would not avail themselves of this opportunity which yet remains. [Loud cries of "No, no!"] I would appeal to them whether they would not avail themselves of the time which yet remains for re-considering the position they have taken. [Renewed cries of "No, no!"] We have endeavoured to carry on the discussions on the Bill upon its old lines and the old principles. There are one of two courses open to the House. One course is to persevere in what we have been endeavouring to do during many hours—to induce the House to go on with the Bill in the manner in which the Bill ought to be conducted. There is not the smallest reason why we should not continue to discuss the Bill, laying aside, as far as we can, the animosities and passions which have troubled us for some time. I think some further time may be spent in following out that course. But if it should appear that it is impossible to make progress with the Bill in that way, it will be for the Committee to consider whether it should not take some different course—report the circumstances to the House, and leave it to the House to say what should be done. I am reluctant to believe even yet—seeing well the position in which they stand, and the course which it may be necessary to adopt—that there may not be a change of attitude on the part of the hon. Gentlemen; and therefore for the present, in the absence of Gentlemen whom I do not see among us, I hope that the Committee will persevere and try to carry the Bill through in the ordinary course by considering the clauses. ["Hear, hear!"]

MR. O'DONNELL

said, he rose to make a few remarks on the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and to say a few words by way of explanation. [Cries of "No! no!" "Withdraw! Withdraw!"] It was perfectly clear he could only speak with the indulgence of the Committee. The Chancellor of the Exchequer expressly stated that he desired to hear some expression of opinion which might guide him in his future proceedings. All through this contest he (Mr. O'Donnell) felt that he would have most willingly got out of it if he could have done so consistently with the engagement which he had entered into. He understood that the contest was to have been a contest between his hon. Friends and the supporters of Her Majesty's Government on a system of relays. As long as the matter was to be fought out on terms of physical endurance, he felt it impossible for him to budge one inch; but he gathered from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that if ever there was any intention to wear out his hon. Friends and himself by physical endurance, that intention had been given up. ["No, no!"] Now they were threatened that the power of the House should be directed against them. That altered totally the conditions of the contest, and he did not feel at all bound to continue it under the circumstances. With respect to the charge brought against him by the Secretary of State for War—that he had voted against the Amendment which he had himself proposed—he asked, was it not a fact that the acceptance of that Amendment was illusory on the part of the Government, the object being to throw out both the clause and the Amendment? He asked, whether it was fair to accuse him of obstruction because he met the tactics of the Government by similar tactics?

THE O'DONOGHUE

said, that the observations of the hon. Member (Mr. O'Donnell) should not be allowed to pass without one remark. They all understood the character of this contest. It was a contest between those who would destroy the honour and authority of this House and those who would maintain them. [Cheers.] And as he understood the feelings of the House, they were these—they would accept no concession from the Party to which the hon. Gentleman belonged [Loud Cheers], and they would make no concession to them, because they knew it was perfectly useless. [Renewed Cheers.]

Motion put, and negatived.

Question put, "That the clause stand part of the Bill;" put, and negatived.

Clauses 29 to 33, inclusive, negatived.

Clauses 34 and 35 agreed to.

Money Votes. Royal Assent.

Clause 36 (Appropriation and Tax Bills), agreed to. [A.M. 12.0]

Clause 37 (Recommendation of money votes).

MR. O'DONNELL,

moved, in page 7, line 15, after "general," to insert "acting with the advice of Ministers responsible to Parliament," his object being to give the Colonies some more effective guarantee for Constitutional Government than was contained in the Bill.

Amendment proposed, In page 7, line 15, after the word "General," to insert the words "acting by the advice of Ministers responsible to Parliament."—(Mr. O'Donnell.)

MR. J. LOWTHER

opposed the Amendment, on the ground that it was quite uncalled for.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: — Ayes 2; Noes 137: Majority 135.—(Div. List, No. 287.) [A.M. 12.10]

AYES — Gray, E. D. Nolan, Captain TELLERS—Mr. O'Donnell and Mr. Biggar.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 38 (Royal Assent to Bills, &c), agreed to.

[Mr. RAIKES, having returned to the House, resumed the Chair. It was now ten minutes after Noon of Wednesday.]

Clause 39 (Disallowance by Order in Council of Act assented to by Governor General).

MR. O'DONNELL

moved to omit the words "within two years from the receipt thereof by the Secretary of State," on the ground that that period was too long to permit this Bill to remain hanging over the heads of the Colonies, inasmuch as it might promote intrigues in the Colonial Legislatures.

Amendment moved, lines 28 and 29, leave out "within two years from the receipt thereof by the Secretary of State."—(Mr. O'Donnell.)

MR. J. LOWTHER

opposed the Amendment.

MR. BIGGAR

supported the Amendment, but would prefer one year to two.

MR. GORST

pointed out that the words objected to were restrictive ones, and without them the Bill would hang over the heads of the Colonies indefinitely.

MR. O'DONNELL

withdrew his Amendment in favour of that of the hon. Member for Cavan.

MR. BIGGAR moved to substitute "one year" for "two years," in the clause.

MR. J. LOWTHER

said, he could not accept this Amendment either.

After some further discussion.

MR. GRAY

suggested that at length —[it being now 25 minutes past 12 o'clock]—Her Majesty's Government should consent that Progress should now be reported. [Determined cries of "No, no!"]

MR. PARNELL

also urged that Progress should be reported. The hon. Member for Dungarvan was physically unable to proceed with the numerous Amendments which stood in his name upon the Paper. [Ironical cheers.] He therefore proposed that Progress should now be reported, and that the Government should proceed with the Business on the Paper for to-day. [Loud cries of "No!"] He begged to move that Progress be reported.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do now report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. Parnell.)

MR. GATHORNE HARDY

said, that the Committee—not the Government— had come to a resolution to carry this Bill through at this Sitting. [Loud cheers.] If the hon. Member for Dungarvan was exhausted, it was because he had exhausted himself in Motions that Progress be reported and that the Chairman leave the Chair, instead of proceeding with his Amendments. Had the hon. Gentleman proceeded with his Amendments, the Bill would have passed through Committee long since. If the hon. Member was exhausted, the Committee were not, and they intended to proceed with the Bill. [Loud cheers.]

MR. O'DONNELL

protested against the conduct of Her Majesty's Government in seeking by mere physical force to hurry this Bill through Committee. If the Bill were forced through the Committee in one Sitting in obedience to the resolution of the Government, it would fail of that careful consideration which so important a measure demanded. They were now about to deal with a very important branch of the subject — the clauses relating to the provincial government, and the all-important clauses relating to the distribution of legislative powers, and therefore he urged upon the Government the necessity for reporting Progress.

MR. BERESFORD HOPE

most emphatically repudiated the assertion of the hon. Member that Her Majesty's Government were endeavouring to pass this Bill by mere physical force. It was not Her Majesty's Government who had come to the resolution to pass this Bill through the Committee, but the Committee who were determined to assert the dignity and the respectability of the House against the attacks of the smallest and most contemptible minority— ["Order!"]

THE CHAIRMAN

rose—

MR. SULLIVAN

also rose, and moved that the words of the hon. Member for Cambridge University should be taken down. [Loud cries of "Order!"]

THE CHAIRMAN

said, he must point out to the hon. and learned Member who had just risen that he was guilty of great disrespect to the Committee as well as to the Chair in rising to speak when the Chairman had risen. He must point out to the hon. Member for Cam- bridge University that the words he had used were entirely un-Parliamentary, and must be withdrawn.

MR. BERESFORD HOPE

said, he would of course at once withdraw the words which he had used, and he begged to apologize to the Chairman and the Committee for using them. He was going on to say that during the time that he had been in Parliament he had never seen such loud pretensions to courage, such bold determination "to die upon the floor of the House," and see the remaining Members dead around their own corpses, so suddenly, so amusingly, and so unexpectedly collapse upon a general suggestion of vaguely contingent unpleasantness in store for troublesome Members.

MR. SULLIVAN

wished to explain why he had moved that the words uttered by the hon. Member for Cambridge University be taken down, and to apologize to the Chairman if he had been guilty of disrespect to him. It would be remembered that there had been a ruling the other evening that words objected to should be taken down at once, before any further debate intervened, and he was afraid that some other hon. Member might by speaking preclude him from moving that the words of the hon. Member for Cambridge University should be taken down, if he did not rise at once—["Agreed, agreed!"] He emphatically declared that those shouts of "Agreed" would not improve the difficulty of that day. He had endeavoured to compose difficulties; but when those shouts of opposition arose, the blood was excited, and they knew with what result.

Motion (Mr. Parnell) negatived.

Amendment (Mr. Biggar) negatived.

Amendment proposed, At the end of the Clause, to add the words "Provided always, That no Act shall be annulled by such disallowance which relates to purely internal matters of the Confederation, and which has been passed in two preceding Sessions by the Confederation Parliament."— (Mr. O'Donnell.)

MR. J. LOWTHER

opposed the Amendment, which he did not think the hon. Member could be serious in proposing.

Question put, "That those words be there added."

The Committee divided: — Ayes 3; Noes 164: Majority 161.—(Div. List, No. 288.) [A.M. ]

AYES — Biggar, J. G. Nolan, Captain Sullivan, A. M.

TELLERS—Mr. O'Donnell and Mr. Parnell.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 40 (Signification of Queen's pleasure on Bill reserved).

MR. O'DONNELL

moved, in page 7, line 36, to leave out all after "have," to end of clause, and insert force unless six months have elapsed from the day on which it was presented to the Governor General for the Queen's consent without any signification that the said assent had been refused, or that the Governor General is only prepared to assent thereto subject to certain amendments to be specified by him.

MR. J. LOWTHER

opposed the Amendment.

Amendment negatived; Clause agreed to.