§ SIR GEORGE CAMPBELLasked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether it is proposed to send any more business to the Standing Committee of Law and Justice; and, whether, either by reconstituting the Committee or by adding fifteen Members for the purpose, and somewhat extending its functions, some of the Scotch business which the House is unable to undertake might not be committed to it?
§ MR. MONKasked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether the Government would support a Motion to refer the Bill "To consolidate and amend the Law of Partnerships," which was read a second time and amended by a Select Committee last Session, to the Standing Committee on Law and Justice?
MR. GLADSTONEI must refer the hon. Members to the statement which was made during the Autumn Session, with respect to the Bills to be referred to the Grand Committees. On that occasion I gave the House to understand that the Government would not propose the reference to the Grand Committees of any Bills other than certain important Bills, which have turned out to be four in number, thereby recognizing the experimental character of the operation. 54 At the same time, I left the question open whether the Bills in the hands of private Members not agreeable to the general disposition of the Houses, should that be found to exist, be referred to these Committees, as, under these circumstances, I do not think the initiative of the Government should be used for such a purpose, except in deference to a very general desire on the part of the House. I am bound to say, also, that I am doubtful whether, at the present period of the Session, it would be possible to bring the Grand Committee on Law into operation de novo for my hon. Friend's (Mr. Monk's) purpose. I should be sorry, however, to speak in disparaging terms with regard to the measure. Its general purpose is very much favoured by the Government; and it is even possible to be supposed that the House might wish to see it in the hands of the Grand Committee. I would encourage my hon. Friend, if he would be good enough to do so, to communicate with the President of the Board of Trade on the subject.
§ MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTasked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether, in view of the importance of giving full time for the discussion by the Upper House of the Tenants' Compensation Bill and of the Bankruptcy Bill, and of the fact that these Bills meet with far less opposition than the Corrupt Practices Bill, the Government will postpone the further consideration of the latter Bill till the Tenants' Compensation and Bankruptcy Bills have passed that House?
MR. GLADSTONESir, my answer to the hon. Member must be simply in the negative. Nothing would be gained by making the important change in the order of our proceedings which the hon. Member suggests.
§ MR. ONSLOWasked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether he can now state on what day he proposes to resume the debate on the question of the payment by India of the troops employed by that Government in the recent Egyptian Campaign?
MR. GLADSTONEIn reply to the hon. Gentleman, I must repeat, in a measure, what I said to my hon. Friend below the Gangway (Mr. Broadhurst), that I do not think the time has yet come when I could attempt with advantage to fix a day.