QUESTIONS. (Hansard, 31 March 1879)

§ MR. SCLATER-BOOTH,
said, he could not fix a day for the second reading of the County Boards Bill, but that there was no intention of taking it until after Easter.

§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir JOHN HOLKER)
said, he hoped to be able to proceed with the second reading of the Bankruptcy Bill on Thursday next. It would be in the hands of hon. Members to-morrow. He would undertake not to bring it on after an unreasonable hour—say 12 o'clock.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
said, he feared there was not much prospect of their being able tot ake the Public Works Loans Bill before Easter.

§ SIR JULIAN GOLDSMID
said, that as he understood that 22 Liberal Members intended speaking in the adjourned debate on the Zulu War, and as many as six or eight Conservative Members, he should wish to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on what day he proposed that the debate should be resumed, if by any chance those 30 speeches could not be crowded into that evening's debate?

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER,
in reply, said, he did not know that he had really any right to say anything at all on the subject. He hoped the speeches would not be of very great length. The discussion had already occupied two nights, and he hoped that the debate would be concluded that evening. He was afraid he should not be able to offer Thursday, as the Financial Statement was fixed for that night, and he could not alter the arrangement without serious inconvenience to the public service. The only thing would be to ask hon. Gentlemen who had Notices on the Paper for to-morrow to waive their rights, in order that the debate might then be taken, should it not be finished that evening. He was afraid, however, they would not be disposed to comply.

§ MR. E. JENKINS
wished to know, as it might considerably affect the course of that night's debate, what opportunity the Government proposed to give for the discussion of the Motion he had placed on the Paper in reference to South Africa? Not having "grown grey in the public service," he felt he had no claim upon Ministers for facilities in that way; but if the Government would give a day for the discussion, he should be prepared to place the opening of the question in the hands of any other hon. Member. He had written to the noble 20 Lord on the front Opposition Bench (the Marquess of Hartington) in reference to the subject, but had received no reply.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
said, he could hardly answer the Question without Notice. Perhaps it would be better they should finish the present debate before making any further arrangements?

§ MR. E. JENKINS
said, he simply wished to point out that the question had already been opened up by the Motion and Amendments before the House; and it would simplify matters, and perhaps prevent some difficulty arising in the debate, if the Government could give a definite answer to his question.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
said, he felt a difficulty in making any promise on the subject. He had no doubt the hon. Member would be able to find an opportunity of bringing the Motion forward within a reasonable time. Otherwise, of course, it would be the desire of the Government to assist him; but, meantime, it was not possible to make any, definite arrangements.

§ SIR JULIAN GOLDSMID,
in consequence of the answer of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, wished to ask the hon. Member for East Gloucestershire (Mr. J. R. Yorke), Whether, in the event of the debate not being concluded at the present sitting, he intended to give way with his Motion for to-morrow in reference to Wellington College?

§ MR. J. R. YORKE,
in reply, said, he was not aware that there was any general wish on the part of the House to extend the debate beyond that evening. In any case, the subject he proposed to bring forward to-morrow was one of very considerable importance; and those with whom he acted in the matter were of opinion that further delay in the consideration of the subject would be very objectionable. It was not, therefore, his intention to give way.