§ COLONEL NOLANmoved the adjournment of the House, on the ground that such an important Bill as this should not be taken at this hour, especially as the Government Bench was deserted.
§ COLONEL ALEXANDERsupported the Motion, observing that the House had now been sitting over 14 hours.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—(Colonel Nolan.)
§ MR. TREVELYANsaid, the Motion he had to propose was for leave to introduce this Bill, and that was a Motion which was usually made at any hour, and which was generally allowed to be made as a matter of courtesy. He appealed to hon. Members to allow him to do what he had always endeavoured to allow them to do—namely, to lay their Bills before the House.
§ MR. HEALYsaid, it was quite true that the Government had given facilities to private Members for the introduction of Bills which did not excite general interest; but he could not give approval to the right hon. Gentleman on that account. This Bill was one of enormous public importance to Ireland, and one upon which the fate of Ireland for a century would depend. He wished to let a little light in upon this matter. About 1 o'clock yesterday morning, Irish Members agreed to let the Government have a little money, so far as Ireland was concerned, on the understanding that this Bill would not be brought in. But what happened? Lord Spencer was angry, and he told the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland on no account to let this morning pass without bringing in this Bill. That was the state of the facts.
§ MR. TREVELYANsaid, the story was utterly untrue, and he could not believe that the hon. Member credited it.
§ MR. J. G. TALBOTasked whether it was competent for the hon. Member 885 to discuss these matters on the Question now before the House?
§ MR. SPEAKERThe hon. Member is bound to speak to the Question before the House.
§ MR. HEALYsaid, he would speak to the point of Order, which he had been going to speak to when interrupted by the hon. Member for the University of Oxford. He would ask the Speaker whether he had not, on a previous occasion, ruled that the statement that an assertion of an hon. Member was utterly untrue was out of Order? He could refresh the right hon. Gentleman's memory.
§ MR. SPEAKERIf the right hon. Gentleman has attributed want of truth to an hon. Member he is out of Order.
§ MR. HEALYsaid, as to the point raised by the hon. Member for the University of Oxford, he wished to say that in any remarks he had been making he had only followed the statement so far as he could of the right hon. Gentleman. As the right hon. Gentleman said that Earl Spencer did not make this remark to him, he would withdraw the suggestion. But if it were as the right hon. Gentleman had stated, why were the Government anxious to introduce the Bill to-night? Why would not Monday afternoon be good enough? When a Motion was made on Friday night, as hon. Members would remember, the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister himself had stated that 12 o'clock at night was quite late enough for Gentlemen to be out of bed; and, surely, therefore, Monday night would be early enough for them to introduce this Bill. The debate on Monday could be adjourned at midnight, or at I o'clock on Tuesday morning, and then the right hon. Gentleman would have his opportunity. It was not reasonable to introduce the Bill at an hour when not a single word of the debate could be reported in the newspapers. It was not reasonable to ask the House to sit up beyond the present hour to hear a statement on the question. He would ask English hon. Gentlemen how they would like to be treated in this way if they were in a minority, and the Irish Members were in a majority in that House? Would they not think that the Irish Members were tyrannical and hardhearted if, under such circumstances, they did not give English Members the 886 opportunity Irish Members were now asking for? English Members did not understand the feeling of the Irish people on this matter, otherwise they would not insist upon sitting up to any hour in the morning to have the Bill introduced. If the right hon. Gentleman insisted, of course, as the Irish Members were a mere fractional part of the House, he would be able to ignore their wishes; but, at the same time, such action would lead to very regrettable scenes. If the Bill were a desirable one the right hon. Gentleman would have a fair opportunity of showing it to the country on Monday, for the papers would be able to report it.
§ MR. LABOUCHEREsaid, he thought that at 4 o'clock in the morning it was generally understood that no contentious matter should be taken. He would not enter into the question as to whether the Bill should be discussed or not at this hour. Hon. Members from Ireland thought the measure most important, and unquestionably they intended to discuss the first reading. Should they, therefore, be called upon to do so when there were no reporters present, or when the reporters were not exercising their ordinary functions, at 4 o'clock in the morning? The right hon. Gentleman would, no doubt, himself admit that of late Irish Business had gone off most satisfactorily, and this was not likely to be the case if the course the Government were at present adopting were persisted in. They knew how action of this kind would be resisted by English Members if this were an English instead of an Irish Bill of great importance.
MR. O'BRIENsaid, they had been about four hours over the Parochial Charities Bill. No doubt there were some very important points in that measure, and hon. Members did not begrudge the time which had been devoted to them; but they certainly thought that the liberties of the people of Ireland were at least as important as the provisions of that Bill. He must protest against this system of dealing with the liberties of the people of Ireland in this nocturnal way at 4 o'clock in the morning. [Laughter.] He meant at 4 o'clock in the morning. They had had a forecast to-day of a Scotch Saturday. If Her Majesty's Government were not able to do their Business at reason- 887 able hours, let them give them an Irish Saturday.
§ MR. T. P. O'CONNORsaid, he felt compelled to say a word or two, as some of the language of the Chief Secretary for Ireland partook of the character almost of personal reference to him.
§ MR. TREVELYANsaid, he had not been referring to the hon. Member's Bill, but to two other Bills—the Sea Fisheries (Ireland), and the Irish Reproductive Loan Fund Act (1874) Amendment Bills.
§ MR. T. P. O'CONNORsaid, the right hon. Gentleman would have been justified in saying that he had also facilitated a third Bill—namely, the Labourers' (Ireland) Bill, of which he (Mr. T. P. O'Connor) had happened to be in charge. So far as the right hon. Gentleman claimed credit to having allowed the introduction of these Irish Bills, as a matter of courtesy they gave him every credit for that. He had co-operated with Irish Members with regard to these Bills; but he did it on two conditions on his side and theirs, the condition on his side being that lie approved of the principles of the Bills he facilitated. The right hon. Gentleman did not seem to say that he had facilitated by one hour the passage of Bills the principle of which he objected to. Irish Members, on their part, had accepted the facilities the right hon. Gentleman had given to them on the understanding that they had liberty of action as to Bills they did not agree with. They were not to be supposed to be willing to barter away their rights and their liberties as to their action on Bills they strongly opposed. The right hon. Gentleman said that it was a matter of courtesy to allow Members, whether private or official, to take the first stage of a Bill; but that was not the question here. The question was, whether a Member should be allowed to take the first stage of a Bill, which was to be stoutly contested, at five minutes to 4 o'clock in the morning? He challenged the right hon. Gentleman to give a single instance of the first stage of a Bill to which strong objection was taken being allowed, by courtesy or otherwise, at five minutes to 4 in the morning. The question really was, whether the first reading of a strongly-opposed Bill should be permitted at this hour? He would put it to hon. Members on the 888 other side of the House—to Liberal Members—whether they would permit the Government to tyrannize over the Irish Members on this question? Hon. Members on those Benches would surely give credit to the Irish Members who had sat up for three hours attempting to improve the Parochial Charities Bill. He would express his astonishment and surprise at the way in which hon. Members on that (the Conservative) side of the House, whatever their interests might be, joined in what, if it were not effected on the floor of the House, might be described as intrigues and conspiracies to assist the Government whenever the liberties of Ireland were affected.
§ MR. SPEAKERI must request the hon. Member to confine himself to the Question before the House, which is the adjournment of the House.
§ MR. T. P. O'CONNORsaid, he would tell the Chief Secretary that the Bill lie was now endeavouring to smuggle through the House at this hour was a measure to which the Irish Members were determined to offer most strenuous opposition at every stage. There was another argument in favour of the adjournment of the House. They were informed, by an important Government functionary, that the Leadership of the House was in commission. That was a statement made within the hearing of the House, and within the last 20 or 25 minutes; and, in order to prove the accuracy of the statement, an hon. Member on the Treasury Bench had indulged in an exhibition of temper—he would call it that rather than an aberration of judgment.
§ MR. SPEAKERThe hon. Member is now referring to what took place in Committee; and he is, therefore, irregular.
§ MR. T. P. O'CONNORsaid, he was referring to a statement which had been made in Committee; but it was one relating to the Business of the House at that moment; and, à fortiori, he should think it would apply to the discussion of the Business 20 or 25 minutes from that period. He did not think a question of this kind should be brought forward when they had no Cabinet Minister present. How did they know but that the Prime Minister, if he were in his place, would not throw over his subordinate and agree to an adjournment? He certainly thought the right lion. Gentleman (Mr. Trevelyan) would lose nothing 889 by postponing the introduction of this Bill.
§ MR. O'SHEAsaid, he did not think the Chief Secretary could accuse him for having endeavoured to prevent him from endeavouring to bring in this Bill; on the contrary, he had put Question after Question in the House for weeks past, endeavouring to urge on the right hon. Gentleman to introduce the measure, so that Irish Members might have an opportunity of seeing what it contained. He had taken great interest in this matter, and was anxious to see the Bill introduced; but the reason he supported the adjournment was because he did not think that the Bill could go before the country if introduced at such a late hour. The Dublin papers were now being published; and if the Bill were proceeded with now, the result would be that they would be transacting Business which would be materially affecting the Constabulary Force in Ireland, in which the people of Ireland, rightly or wrongly—he could not say which—took the most intense interest. He was perfectly certain that neither he himself, nor any Irish Member in the House, wished to prevent the Bill being brought in and discussed if it were introduced at a reasonable hour. They were perfectly willing to listen to any interesting statement of the right hon. Gentleman, if he would only make it at an hour when not only Members of Parliament could have the benefit of the information the right hon. Gentleman gave them, but when the country could have the benefit of it as well. No doubt a second edition of the Dublin papers would be published with some account of the statement of the right hon. Gentleman, but the report would not be a full and fair one; and, under all these circumstances, considering what had been done here to-night and the Business that had been transacted, and considering also the hour, he trusted the right hon. Gentleman would see that the request he made to him was a reasonable one, and that he would defer the introduction of the Bill until such day as he could bring it on at a reasonable hour.
§ MR. DAWSONsaid, he was sure the right hon. Gentleman would see that, in addition to the reasons brought forward by other hon. Members, he might be allowed to adduce some others as taking 890 great interest in the City of Dublin, whose Police Force was to be reformed by this Bill. To his mind it would be deplorable if a Bill of such vital importance were introduced at a moment when it was impossible for the people of Ireland to be placed in possession of the details of the proposed legislation. He did not think it was consonant with the ordinary courtesy of the right hon. Gentleman to insist upon going on with the Bill now; and he (Mr. Dawson) called upon him to accede to the very moderate and reasonable request of hon. Members to put off the introduction of his measure to such an hour when they would be able to discuss it as it deserved, and when the discussion could be reported to the country. If the right hon. Gentleman persisted in his present course, he would very largely undo a great deal that he had done in Ireland, and in his Office, to make himself agreeable to the people. It would be a very serious matter if he should, by any kind of force, endeavour to push this Bill forward. He was sure that it was only necessary to appeal to the right hon. Gentleman, under the circumstances, to accede to the adjournment of the debate.
§ MR. R. POWERsaid, the present was a most extraordinary way of dealing with Business of this kind. The right hon. Gentleman had always professed his anxiety to conciliate Irish Members upon Irish questions, and on a great many occasions, no doubt, he had done so. On the present occasion, however, they had come to a Bill of the very greatest importance to the people of Ireland, for it was on a subject in which they had taken a great deal of interest. They had come to a Bill which concerned the Police Force of Ireland, and what did the right hon. Gentleman do? Why, notwithstanding that he found every Irish Member of the House in favour of an adjournment, notwithstanding that he had failed to get support from any single Irish Member, and notwithstanding that he had declared his anxiety to govern Ireland according to Irish ideas, and that he was urged to postpone the Bill until Monday, at a time when their speeches could be fully reported, he got up and said he was going to insist upon having the Bill read a first time. Although he had heard many appeals made to Chief Secretaries without avail, and although he 891 knew it was almost useless attempting to move any of those right hon. Gentlemen by appeal, yet the matter was so serious on this occasion that he would make an appeal, and he trusted the right hon. Gentleman would see his way to making an exception to the ordinary rule in yielding to it.
§ MR. COURTNEYsaid, the hon. Member for Monaghan (Mr. Healy) had asked that the Bill should be brought on at a reasonable hour on some other night; but the hon. Gentleman must know that Notices of Motion always came after the Orders of the Day; and, therefore, to whatever day this Bill was put off, it would be very questionable whether the Government would be able to bring it on at an early period of the evening.
§ COLONEL NOLANCould they not bring it on on Tuesday?
§ MR. COURTNEYNo. The hon. and gallant Member forgets that the House has determined that for the rest of the Session Orders of the Day have precedence on Tuesdays also. He would, however, throw out this suggestion, which, if adopted, might succeed in bringing the measure on before 1 o'clock. Of course, he could not fix any particular hour for the resumption of the debate; but he would make this proposal. If the hon. and gallant Member would withdraw his Motion, and permit the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland to move for leave to introduce his Bill, and then, after that Motion had been put, without explanation let them adjourn the discussion, the adjournment would make the question an Order of the Day, and the debate could then be resumed at a reasonable hour.
§ COLONEL NOLANsaid, that he should be very glad to accept this proposal, and would, therefore, withdraw his Motion.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
Motion made, and Question proposed,
That leave be given to bring in a Bill to improve the administration of the Royal Irish Constabulary and the Dublin Metropolitan Police; and for other purposes connected with the said forces."—(Mr. Trevelyan.)Motion made, and Question proposed, "'That the Debate be now adjourned."—(Mr. Arthur O' Connor.)Motion agreed to.
Debate adjourned till Monday next.