MR. GLADSTONEsaid, with reference to the Notice of Amendment he had given with regard to the Motion respecting the Transvaal, he proposed to make an alteration in it, and he thought it convenient to call attention to it. The Amendment spoke of "the inability of the Transvaal Government to restrain certain agencies;" and, as he had no intention of ruling whether the Transvaal had been unable or unwilling, he proposed to substitute "the absence of any effectual restraint upon those agencies," so as to exclude the question whether the Transvaal Government had or had not been able to restrain them. Therefore, he proposed to omit the name of the Transvaal Government?
§ LORD JOHN MANNERSasked, when, and how it was proposed that the House should discuss the Amendment?
MR. GLADSTONEin reply, said, as far as his Amendment was concerned, it was a mere expression of what he took to be the prevailing sense of the House on the debates which had taken place, and he was not aware that, on their part, it would require much further discussion. It was an Amendment to the Motion of the right hon. Member for East Gloucestershire (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach), which stood in order for discussion on Friday, at 2 o'clock.
§ LORD JOHN MANNERSsaid, that the Motion and Amendment that were before the House would require to be disposed of, and there were one or two others that would require to be disposed of.
MR GLADSTONEsaid, he was quite prepared to acquiesce in their being disposed of, and when the Motion of the right hon. Member for Gloucestershire was reached, he would move 1841 his Amendment expressing what he believed to be the prevalent sense of the House in the debate.
§ SIR GEORGE CAMPBELLsaid, that he should be quite willing to withdraw the Amendment which stood in his name.