COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 16 April 1883)

MR. GLADSTONE
Sir Arthur Ot-way—In rising, according to Notice, to move a Resolution upon this subject, I may say that, if the Resolution is agreed to by the Committee, I shall have to propose a corresponding Resolution with regard to Lord Wolseley. This Motion can hardly be termed a mere matter of form; but, at the same time, I may say that the period is so recent when I had the honour of asking the House of Commons to pass a Vote of Thanks to Lord Alcester, and the reasons for that request were then so fully stated by me, and heard with so much patience by the House, that I think I can assume that what I then said is still within the recollection of the Committee; and, at all events, that there still remains in the minds of the Members of the Committee a sufficient recollection of what I stated as to the ground upon which this proposal is made to justify me in asking them, without further preface, to take the first step towards the introduction of the Bill which will be brought in. Any question that may arise with respect to the correspondence of the Bill with the precedents applicable to the case I think I may postpone until a future stage, when it will be my duty to enter upon the merits of the Bill upon any Notice that may call it in question. I shall, therefore, content myself, in substance, with this reference to what happened upon a former occasion, and I now place the Resolution in the hands of the Committee.

§ MR. LABOUCHERE
The right hon. Gentleman has said that this is only a mere matter of form; and I understand the right hon. Gentleman to say, further, that it is desirable the discussion and the vote on the question should be taken upon the second reading of the Bill rather than upon this stage. Of course, that being so, we shall all be anxious to comply with the wishes of the right hon. Gentleman; but I wish it to be understood that, in abstaining from discussing the matter on the present occasion, we are in no way prejudicing our case, nor must it be implied that we consent to the principle of the right hon. Gentleman's proposal.

MR. GLADSTONE
That is so; and the Committee is in no way committed by entertaining this preliminary proceeding. When I said it was a matter of mere form, I merely intended to excuse myself from repeating on this occasion the statement which I made some time ago.

§ SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE
I only wish to say that I fully understood the spirit in which the proposal was made; and, of course, it was only in consequence of the proposal being made in that form that I did not take upon myself the duty of seconding the Resolution.

MR. GLADSTONE
I beg to move a corresponding Resolution with regard to Lord Wolseley. This proceeding is, like the last one, in most exact conformity with what we can find to have been the form of proceeding in analogous cases. Therefore, as my statement in reference to the services of Lord Wolseley upon a recent occasion was still more full than my statement in regard to the 329 services of Lord Alcester, I may dispense, I think, with troubling the Committee with any further statement at the present moment.

§ MR. LEWIS
I quite understand that the general feeling of the Committee is, that no discussion should take place today on this Resolution, as none took place on the preceding one; but, for my own part, I have been particularly struck with the dilemma in which the Committee and the country are placed— namely, that supposing we heap honours on men who have had to do nothing, or practically nothing, what are we to hold in reserve for those officers who may be called upon to uphold and defend the honour of the country in some real engagement? I do not hesitate to say that I look upon this Vote and upon these proceedings as part of the new "Jingo" policy which Her Majesty's Government have lately adopted for their own glorification and the amusement of the British public. I do not forget the mean way in which Sir Frederick Roberts was treated. I do not forget the mean way in which Sir Frederick Roberts, who was a General who not only distinguished himself, but cut his way through a piece of work beside which Lord Wolseley's operations appear to sink into insignificance. I do not forget what Her Majesty's Government did with regard to Sir Frederick Roberts; and I want to know, if these honours and these emoluments are to be hung around the necks of such men as Lord Wolseley and Lord Alcester, what are to be conferred upon men who perform deeds like those which, in times past, reflected glory upon our Army and Navy? The matter requires, not only at the hands of the independent Liberal Party, but at the hands of the Conservative Party, a little more investigation than it seems to have received hitherto. What has been the meaning of all the theatrical display which the country has witnessed since last September or October? Does any man think that it was for the real glorification or 330 elevation of England in a military or moral sense? I would venture to suggest that what happened in the Park and in the public streets with regard to the parade of the Indian Contingent was as much connected with the glorification of Her Majesty's Government as the glorification of England; and I would not, on this occasion, have ventured to say one word, if I had not noticed that the extreme calmness of the Liberal Party is somewhat remarkable. We have recently had an explosion from that side of the House on the subject of economy; but it did not last very long, for hon. Members opposite were satisfied with the pat on the back they received from the Prime Minister. On this occasion they seem inclined to sit quiet, or, at all events, to postpone their opposition. I think we have a great question to discuss with Her Majesty's Government in regard to this Vote. They thought it right and necessary, with reference to the policy of their Predecessors, to proclaim that right hon. Gentlemen on this side of the House were always wrong, and that the new policy they intended to substitute was always to be right. Yet they have imitated the policy of their Predecessors in various particulars, and they desire to imitate it now, in heaping Peerages upon Peerages and pensions upon pensions, notwithstanding the fact that their most recent ally is one of the most distinguished opponents of pensions in any form extending beyond the present possessor. If it is desired to defer the discussion until Thursday, I trust that, on that day, the House will be put in possession of some of the principles upon which Her Majesty's Government are at present guided; and I venture to hope that a large contingent from these Benches will join hon. Gentlemen on the other side in endeavouring to find out what honours this country will have in reserve for its distinguished Generals and Admirals who may have to fight the enemy in the open, and to perform deeds similar to those which have rendered our country famous in the annals of the world.

§ MR. RYLANDS
I do not rise for the purpose of continuing this debate, but merely to say that the reason why none of my hon. Friends think it necessary to discuss the question at the present moment is, that the postponement of the discussion is demanded on the 331 ground of public convenience, and the Prime Minister has already promised that there shall be a full discussion on the measure. We therefore think that the proper opportunity for discussing it will be when the Bill has been brought in, and it is proposed to read it a second time. I understand that it will then be placed as the first Order of the Day; and we propose to reserve, until that time, an expression of the views which we entertain in regard to the present proposal, it being distinctly understood that the fact of our allowing the present Motion to pass without comment will, in no way, prejudice our future action.

MR. GLADSTONE
It is perfectly plain that the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Lewis), when he rose from his seat, had no intention of making the speech which he has delivered, because he said he approved of the arrangement under which all opinions were to be reserved; but the torrent within him could not be pent up, and it burst forth in spite of his better judgment. I do not wish to travel over the ground which the hon. Gentleman has traversed on this occasion; but I may make this observation—that if Her Majesty's Government behaved so meanly towards Sir Frederick Roberts, admitting for the moment that they did so, which, however, I do not at all admit—but assuming, for the sake of argument, that they did so, surely the fact ought to put us on our guard against a repetition of similar meanness now. I certainly cannot see how that argument supports the contention of the hon. Member. The hon. Member is perfectly entitled, if he likes, to make our proposals the occasion of any accusation against the Government, and, of course, we shall be prepared, at the proper time, to defend ourselves; but I should not be justified, after having obtained from the kindness of other hon. Gentlemen on both sides of the House the reservation which they have been content to make—I should not be justified in entering upon the matter of the speech of the hon. Member, and I only wish it to be known that our silence in reference to it must not be supposed to imply agreement with any part of it.