§ COLONEL ALEXANDERrose to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, Why the House was allowed to be Adjourned on the Motion of the Hon. Member for the city of Cork on Tuesday the 10th instant before 9 p.m., when a Resolution affecting the interests of the Police of Great Britain, for the third time during the present Session, occupied the first place on the Notice Paper? He might, in putting that Question, state that he never left the House during the whole evening, not even venturing as far as the tea-room. When, however, the hon. Member for Dungarvan (Mr. O'Donnell) rose to address the House on the Question of the adjournment, he went to the Bar to get some refreshment, which was absolutely necessary, and in the short interval of three minutes he found that the Solicitor General for Ireland had consented on the part of the Government to the adjournment of the House, although it was known that an important Motion was going to be brought forward. Ho hoped the Government would do something to protect the rights of private Members. The ballot for a 277 place on the Order Book was rapidly becoming a complete farce.
MR. GLADSTONEI do not know, Sir, whether I am to reply to the speech of the hon. and gallant Member; but, so far as the question is concerned, I will reply to it as well as I can. The hon. and gallant Gentleman asks why the House was allowed to be adjourned? Well, I believe the House was allowed to be adjourned because no Member chose to challenge the adjournment.
§ COLONEL ALEXANDERThe Solicitor General for Ireland was present, and did not challenge it on the part of the Government.
MR. GLADSTONEThe hon. and gallant Gentleman says the Solicitor General for Ireland consented to the adjournment on the part of the Government. I understand that statement is wholly erroneous. He had no power, and he had no right to do so; and it would be very unusual indeed for a Member of the Government to rise in the course of a discussion, knowing that there were a number of Motions by private Members on the Paper, and to state that the Government consented to an adjournment; and I know the hon. and gallant Gentleman is under an entirely erroneous impression as to what took place. I understand there were plenty of Members about the House to challenge the adjournment had a decision been taken.
§ COLONEL ALEXANDERThe Solicitor General for Ireland did not challenge the adjournment.
MR. GLADSTONEIt was no more the duty of the Solicitor General for Ireland to challenge the division than any other Member. I am very sorry that private Members who had Notices on the Paper did not enter into a combination with the hon. and gallant Gentleman, who seems to have done his duty very fully to prevent the calamity that took place.
§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILLsaid, that in consequence of the reply of the right hon. Gentleman, he thought it absolutely necessary to make a few remarks. He would, therefore, move the adjournment of the House in order to obtain from the Government a fuller explanation. He was perfectly certain that, whatever might be thought by the official and the ex-official Members of the House, private Members would not 278 tolerate the manner in which they were treated on Tuesday night, and the way in which the Prime Minister had just treated his bon. and gallant Friend. His hon. and gallant Friend had obtained the first place on the Paper for his Motion on two former occasions. On both these occasions he gave way to the Government. Then a third time, by extraordinary good fortune, he obtained the first place, whereupon the Government requited him for having given way by deliberately allowing the House to be adjourned, in order to avoid discussion of a subject that was very interesting to a large number of county Members. These Members were prepared to discuss it; but the Members of the Government ostentatiously quitted the Treasury Bench, leaving the unfortunate Solicitor General for Ireland without instructions. Who would deny that that was not a deliberately planned thing? The Government were, no doubt, very much put out at not getting the Morning Sitting, and were determined to show private Members that they were not gaining anything by this refusal. It was perfectly evident that the Government did not care one single rush for private Members so long as they got their measures through. He moved that the House do now adjourn.
§ MR. SPEAKERDoes any hon. Member second the Motion?
§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFI will, Sir.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—(Lord Randolph Churchill.)
§ SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTsaid, that the noble Lord had made charges against the Government which were characterized by his well-known courtesy and accuracy. The noble Lord said the Government desired to prevent the Motion of the hon. and gallant Member being discussed. All he could say was that he himself and his hon. Friend the Under Secretary (Mr. Courtney) were there all the evening, and extremely anxious to discuss that Motion. About half-past 8 o'clock, when an Irish Member made a Motion to count out the House, he came in himself to aid in making a House. He did not observe present that large number of county Members who had been described as deeply interested in the Motion. He 279 did not observe a single Member—he I was not even conscious of the presence of the noble Lord, who was so keen to protect the rights of private Members. With the assistance of several Members on the Treasury Bench he was happy to say that a quorum was found, and the House was not then counted out. He afterwards went out, like the hon. and gallant Member, for refreshment, and was sitting in the dining-room, when he heard, to his surprise, the announcement that the Speaker was going home. He inquired of a Member of the Irish Party what had happened, and was informed very good humouredly that that Party had achieved a glorious victory over the Government. That was the simple history of that diabolical conspiracy, on the part of Her Majesty's Government, against the rights of private Members, for which the noble Lord so severely but unjustly blamed them. All he could say was that the Members of the Government were extremely anxious to have the discussion brought on. There was nothing so disagreeable as to have on one's hands a speech which it was impossible to deliver. That had been his case on the three occasions in question; and he should be extremely glad were he able to think that this speech was a thing of the past, instead of a thing of the future. If private Members valued their rights so much, the Government were entitled to expect some assistance from them; and it seemed very unjust for private Members, who had gone away themselves, to come down and accuse the Government of not upholding those rights.
MR. GORSTthought it rather curious that, if the Government were so perfectly innocent, they should have now put up the Home Secretary, who was not in the House at the time of the "count out," instead of the Solicitor General for Ireland, who was. What they complained of was that the hon. and learned Gentleman, representing the Government, assented to the adjournment. The minority had no chance against the will of the Government in favour of an adjournment of the House; but what hon. Members wanted to know was whether the Solicitor General for Ireland did consent to the adjournment; if so, by whose authority and for what purpose?
§ THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON)said, that as his name had been so prominently brought forward, he might be allowed a few words of explanation, especially as the lion. and learned Gentleman the Member for Chatham (Mr. Gorse), who was not himself present to see what occurred, did not choose to take the explanation that had been accurately given in his absence by the Prime Minister. He had never assented to the adjournment. [Mr. GORST: I never said anything of the kind.] He was speaking within the hearing and recollection of the House. He (the Solicitor General for Ireland) was, in this instance, very much in the position of the "needy knife-grinder," who exclaimed, "Story! God bless you, I have none to tell, Sir." He would state precisely what happened. He was also taking refreshment, and did not know of anything which exhausted nature so much as listening to some of the debates in that House. Hearing the bell ring, he immediately followed the Home Secretary and assisted in making a quorum, and he did not leave the House from that time except for a moment. He was not a party to this conspiracy which was alleged to have existed, and which was, in fact, as mythical as the knowledge of the hon. and learned Member for Chatham. He listened respectfully, as he always endeavoured to listen, to the arguments addressed to the House by the Members sitting below the Gangway. He was in the House when the lion. Member for Dungarvan (Mr. O'Donnell) concluded his speech, and he heard the remarks next made by the hon. and learned Member for Bridport (Mr. Warton). When the Question was put for the adjournment, he said "No;" but he did not challenge a division, for he took it for granted that the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Colonel Alexander) would have been present, or would have had somebody present to represent him, to challenge a vote. Finding, however, that no one—not even the hon. and. learned Member for Bridport, whom he looked upon as the champion of the cause—challenged the division, he did not think it his duty to do so. The House was then adjourned, and he left, as the other Members did.
Question put, and negatived.