MR. GORSTasked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether the Government have, as promised before the Easter Recess, taken into their consideration the increase of agrarian crime and the general collapse of the administration of justice in Ireland; whether the Government are yet prepared to state to Parliament the measures they intend to propose for restoring peace and order in Ireland; and, whether he will indicate the time at which such statement on behalf of the Government will be made?
MR. GLADSTONEI think, Sir, the hon. and learned Member has put this Question in ignorance—which is no wonder—[Laughter]—no wonder respecting either him or any other Member of this House, considering the voluminous nature of our proceedings—in ignorance that a similar Question was put to me by the hon. Member for Newcastle (Mr. 1836 J. Cowen) on Friday last. ["No!"] Well, perhaps not a precisely similar Question, but a Question with respect to which the answer falls under the same category. With regard to the Question put by the hon. Member for Newcastle, and still more with regard to this Question, which refers to a statement of our intentions, I can only say that I could not undertake to enter into that subject in reply to a Parliamentary Question. Though it would not require any very detailed explanations, considered as a matter of speech, it would certainly amount to the character of a speech, and for that a very convenient opportunity will, I think, offer itself tomorrow.
§ MR. J. LOWTHERMight I ask, having regard to the fact that a discussion of very considerable importance must obviously arise in consequence of the Ministerial Statement which has been promised for to-morrow night, whether the right hon. Gentleman will re-consider the proposal for a Morning Sitting to-morrow, and thus allow the House to meet when an opportunity will be afforded for a full discussion of that important subject? At the same time, I would wish to address a Question to my right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for the Wigtown Burghs (Sir John Hay). It is whether, having regard to the facts to which I have just referred, he will feel justified in bringing forward so important a Motion as his is at a time when it could not be fully discussed? I cannot expect an answer to this Question now, for, no doubt, he would like to consult his political friends, and perhaps the Government, on this matter; but before the rising of the House I trust he will be in a position to answer.
MR. GLADSTONEThe Question put to me is really whether I will ask the House to rescind a decision come to by a considerable majority after a long discussion? I am not prepared to ask the House to rescind that decision, more particularly as I do not think that the time has yet arrived when a full examination of the proposals which it may be the duty of the Government to make some little time hence, could be entered upon with any benefit to the Public Service.
MR. GORSTsaid, he wanted an answer to the third paragraph of his 1837 Question. He asked at what time a general statement of Irish policy would be made by the Government? The noble Lord on the Front Ministerial Bench (the Marquess of Hartington) had said on Friday that no such general statement would be made on Tuesday night, and that the statement then made would be about the release of the "suspects." The Government ought to indicate to Parliament the time when they would be prepared to make a general statement.
§ MR. HEALYI rise to Order. I wish to ask whether a general statement on the question as to the collapse of justice in Ireland is not a matter of argument, and whether such a question ought not to appear on the Votes of the House? I put this Question because, if Irish Members import into Questions anything of the nature of argument, it is immediately struck out.
MR. GLADSTONEI might myself take exception to one part of the Question. I am not disposed to admit the alleged promise which I am supposed to have given. What I stated was that the whole subject had been and would continue—not during the Recess in particular—under the consideration of the Government. My noble Friend was perfectly right in guarding the House against the idea that a general statement of policy would be made. A general statement of policy, as those terms are usually understood, would be held to mean a statement which would occupy a very considerable period, and would open up many branches of questions with regard to the general condition of Ireland. I am not sure that in that sense it will be our duty to-morrow to make a general statement; but I have no doubt we can conveniently indicate to the House that which, as at present advised, we are inclined to think will have to be proposed or not proposed. The proposals which we may entertain we shall desire to proceed with at as early a period as the necessary Business of the House will permit. It would be quite impossible to indicate them in detail at the present moment.
§ SIR JOHN HAYsaid, the right hon. Gentleman might not be aware that Notices of Amendment to his Motion had been given Notice of by the hon. Members for Salford (Mr. Arthur Arnold) and Glasgow (Mr. Anderson). He had not had the pleasure of being in the 1838 House when the subject of the Evening Sitting was discussed last week, and as far as he had been able to gather—["Order, order!"]
§ MR. SPEAKERI must point out to the right hon. and gallant Gentleman that this matter cannot now become the subject of debate.
§ SIR JOHN HAYsaid, he wished to renew his appeal to the Prime Minister, and in doing so he wished to reply to the Question which was put to him by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for North Lincolnshire (Mr. J. Lowther). He felt it would be unfair to the House to allow him to suppose that, even if the Government did not make an alteration, he should abstain from going on at 9 o'clock. He (Sir John Hay) proposed going on at 9 o'clock, whatever might happen; but he thought it very inconvenient to commence the discussion of so important a Motion at an Evening Sitting, and that, perhaps, it would lead to an adjourned debate.