NOMINATION OF SELECT COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 9 June 1881)

§ MR. BRODRICK
called attention to the course the Government were pursuing with regard to this Bill. The Bill which the Government now proposed to postpone had been on the Paper 25 times—ever since the 4th of May—and on each occasion the 10 different Members who had Motions on the subject were brought down; but there seemed no intention on the part of the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board to proceed with the measure. Considering the importance of the Bill, and of matters connected with it, he expressed his surprise that the right hon. Gentleman, or some other Member of the Government, did not state what the intentions of the Government were with regard to this Committee. He thought the least they could do was to give the House the earliest opportunity of considering a question which they had had on the Paper ever since the Easter Recess. He had ventured to refer to this a little earlier in the evening, when the House was in Committee of Supply, with a suggestion that this Bill should be proceeded with; but the Government showed no disposition to accede to that suggestion, and the time for doing so passed, away. The Bill was being put aside in favour of things of less 217 importance. It had been said earlier that the Government had put a Vote down to show they were in earnest; but this Motion seemed to be put on the Paper to show the Government had no intention of seriously taking it up. The time had come when the Government might be fairly asked to state on what day they proposed to take the measure, and not to put it down continually on days when they knew there would be no chance of proceeding with it. Meanwhile, people having important interests concerned were left in a state of uncertainty, and meetings on the subject were being held all over the country. He did not wish to say more in the absence of the right lion. Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board; but he must say that the Government had neglected the opportunity they had of bringing on the debate this evening, when so many Members were present and prepared to take part in it. He begged to move formally that the debate be adjourned to this day fortnight.

§ SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT
said, if the hon. Member was really anxious to expedite the discussion of this Bill, he showed a curious method of accomplishing his wish by proposing to postpone it for a fortnight. The hon. Member complained that the Bill did not come on; but he was one of the 10 Members who had put down Notices against the Bill being committed. He was one of those who had taken the most effectual means of preventing that which he declared he most desired. He (Sir William Harcourt) could testify from communication with his right hon. Friend, that he was very anxious to bring the Bill on, and had great hope that that opportunity would have offered itself to-night before half-past 12; and, certainly, had it not been for Motions the Government had very little right to expect—Motions from hon. Members who divided in a minority of 8 against the progress of Business—Committee of Supply might have been got through in time to bring on this Bill before half-past 12.

§ VISCOUNT FOLKESTONE
said, it was at that time 1 o'clock.

§ SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT
, resuming, said, then in that case he was incorrect. They had, however, a right to expect that progress in Supply would have been more rapid, and the President of the Local Government Board was prepared to go on with the Bill. At this time of the Session everything, in a certain degree, must yield to Supply, and for no other reason would the Land Law (Ireland) Bill have been suspended for these two days. The urgency of Supply was paramount. It was hoped, however, that Supply would have been disposed of earlier that it was; but the hon. Member, with others, having blocked the Bill by their Notices, it could not be brought on after half-past 12. Under the circumstances, he thought the Government could not in fairness be charged with not having done their best to bring forward the debate. As to the present Motion, substantially it would tend to defeat the measure altogether, as it would not allow the opportunities that might accidentally offer of bringing it forward.

§ SIR R. ASSHETON CROSS
said, it was a mistake to say that his hon. Friend had blocked the Order. His Motion was for after the Committee had been nominated, and the Motion made was for the nomination of the Committee, so that the Notice of his hon. Friend in no way brought the Order within the half-past 12 Rule.

§ SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT
said, he might be wrong; but he was informed it was not so.

§ SIR R. ASSHETON CROSS
said, that it was a mistake the Notice Paper would show. Now, as to putting off the Bill for a fortnight, he agreed that would be a mistake; but he hoped that at the next Sitting the Government would endeavour to bring on the Bill if it could possibly be done. It was really a very pressing matter, and the Government could not know how strongly people felt about it.

§ MR. HIBBERT
said, the President of the Local Government Board was as anxious as anyone in the House that the Bill should be brought on. It had been arranged to report Progress in Supply at 12 or soon after. When the Motion to report Progress was made at a quarter to 12, it was rather too early, 219 and, unfortunately, the Vote upon which the Committee were engaged occupied more than three-quarters of an hour, and prevented his right hon. Friend carrying out his intention. He trusted that the Bill would be proceeded with either at the Morning or Evening Sitting following.

§ MR. A. J. BALFOUR
said, the Home Secretary had been unfortunate in his two statements, in saying that his hon. Friend who opened the discussion had blocked the Bill, which he had not done, and that he (Mr. Balfour) had made a Motion in Committee causing delay and preventing this Bill from coming on. Now, he made no Motion, and he seconded none, and, as a matter of fact, the Motion to report Progress was made a few minutes after 1 o'clock. But, apart from that, the right hon. Gentleman entirely misapprehended the object of his hon. Friend in calling the attention of the House to this subject. He was not complaining of the Bill not being brought on, but of its being down night after night under the pretext of being brought on, which it never was. He desired that the Government should finally say what night this Motion should be taken, and then that the Government should take the steps they had it in their power to take to ensure its being considered on that night.

§ VISCOUNT FOLKESTONE
said, as he had made the Motion for reporting Progress which had been referred to, he might be permitted to say that he did it with no obstructive purpose, but simply because it was a late hour—past 1 o'clock—when he thought it was high time to report Progress, and not to continue voting the money of the country at that hour. He hoped now that his hon. Friend would withdraw the Motion he had made, for if the Government really intended to go on with the Bill tomorrow—a Bill which was of great importance to agricultural constituencies—then, perhaps, they might arrive at a satisfactory conclusion regarding a Bill which, as it stood, he could not help thinking was a very bad one.

§ MR. HENEAGE
said, the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary was misinformed as to his facts. The hon. Member opposite tried to report Progress in order to expedite this Bill. And when he spoke of the blocking Motions on the Paper, he seemed to be in entire ignorance of the fact that the President of the Local Government Board had come 220 to an arrangement with, all those who had Notices on the Paper. The noble Lord the Secretary to the Treasury, however, insisted upon going on with Supply after a time when there was a distinct understanding that the second Order should be brought on, and after hon. Members had been brought down to the House at the express wish of the President of the Local Government Board. He (Mr. Heneage) had a Motion to add to the Members of the Committee, which had been accepted by his right hon. Friend the President of the Local Government Board, and he was told to be present at half-past 11, because Progress was to be reported in order that there might be no mistake in bringing on the Bill. He considered the Bill essentially bad, and did not care whether it came on or not; but he had entered into an engagement to expedite the discussion, as the Government had fairly met those who had objections, and he was quite prepared to go on. But they should not be asked to come down for the purpose night after night. He would like to ask, if there was anyone in authority on the Treasury Bench, at what hour, or after what hour, would or would not the Motion be brought on at the next Sitting, or whether a subordinate occupant of the Treasury Bench would be allowed to go on with Supply to within 10 or 15 minutes of the limit of time when, any Member could continue to talk and prevent the Bill coming on?

§ MR. MUNDELLA
thought the hon. Gentleman could hardly be aware of what took place at a quarter to 12. The President of the Local Government Board sat by his side, and he was anxious that Progress should be reported when the hon. Member moved it shortly afterwards. But the Motion was objected to by Irish Members, and the discussion was continued beyond the half-hour, when the moment was lost for bringing on the Rivers Conservancy Bill. But there was a most anxious desire on the part of both the noble Lord (Lord Frederick Cavendish) and the President of the Local Government Board that the Bill should come on.

§ MR. R. N. FOWLER
observed, that the Government could hardly expect to bring on the Bill at the next Evening Sitting, because there was a very important Motion down that would be likely to occupy the whole time from 9 o'clock. Therefore, if taken to-morrow 221 at all, the Bill must be taken at the Morning Sitting.

§ MR. BRODRICK
did not wish to persevere; but he explained that he moved to report Progress at 22 minutes past 12, and Irish Members spoke for but a few minutes, and the Government unanimously said "No" to reporting Progress. Under the circumstances, he must say he could not compliment the right hon. Gentleman and his Colleagues or their accuracy. He begged to withdraw his Amendment.