§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILLI wish to ask a Question of the Prime Minister with regard to the Business of the House, especially in regard to the Report on the Irish Constabulary Vote, which was taken very late on Friday morning. The Question I wish to ask is, Whether a pledge, given by a Minister in regard to the Business of the House to a particular Member, who may be specially interested in this Business, is only to have effect as regards that particular Member, and is not to have effect has regards the whole House? The pledge given was that the Report would not be brought on after half-past 11 o'clock. There were many Members interested in the subject, among others myself, and who were anxious to take part in the discussion.
MR. GLADSTONEThat Question does not admit of a general answer. It must depend on the circumstances of the case. There are a great many cases where it is known, when a particular Member puts a Question and makes an arrangement on behalf of the whole House, that the House generally is supposed to take an interest in the matter. There are other cases where a Member proposes an arrangement on his own behalf, or on behalf of some particular body of persons with whom he acts. It is evident, in the first case, that a Minister ought to consider himself bound to the whole House; in the second place, that he ought not to consider himself bound to the whole House, if apparently the public convenience required him to act otherwise, and if no information had been conveyed to him that the other parts of the House took an interest in the subject. The Report on the Vote mentioned by the noble Lord was taken at a much later time than that contemplated in my arrangement mentioned to the House; but I was not aware that other portions of the House were at all desirous for the postponement of the Vote, or undoubtedly it would have been done.