MOTION FOR LEAVE. (Hansard, 24 October 1884)

MR. GLADSTONE
Mr. Speaker—Sir, I am not surprised at the unoccu- 236 pied condition of the opposite Bench, which, I think, is quite warranted by the nature of the announcement I made to the House that I had no intention on the present occasion of troubling it with a speech. The reason why that announcement was made will, I believe, be perfectly plain to those who heard it. Last Session I had the opportunity, on various stages of the Bill, but especially on its introduction, of stating at great length the considerations which had led Her Majesty's Government to make the proposals which it contained. But all the arguments then used, and all the facts then adduced, are applicable with increased force to the present occasion; and I think I should be abusing the patience of the House if I were to attempt again to present them even in the most condensed form. I even hope that the debates upon this Bill may not extend to any very great length. At the same time, I am perfectly sensible that, in asking the House for leave to introduce the Bill, the summary manner in which I hope it will be disposed of on the present occasion cannot be taken as any measure of the discussion that may hereafter arise. The introduction of a Bill, when its nature is well understood by the House, is very commonly permitted to take place without discussion, which is reserved to later stages. With regard to those later stages, I have already announced to the House the intention of the Government to lose no time. They believe it to be their duty to the House and the country to press the Bill through its several stages with due regard to the convenience of hon. Members and the sufficiency of opportunities for discussion. It would not be proper for me, although I hope it will be admitted that the present hour is one perfectly appropriate to the purpose for which I rise, to bring this Bill for a second time under the consideration of the House, except at a time entirely convenient to the House. I am given to understand that the discussions connected with the Address are likely to occupy both Monday and Tuesday next; and it has been stated, I believe, by Gentlemen on the opposite side that it would be for the convenience of hon. Members if it were understood that the debate on the second reading would not be taken until Thursday. Sir, it is, I own, with regret that I lose even Wed- 237 nesday, when I consider that the loss of that day adds to the length of this unusual, and, of course, to all, inconvenient Session. At the same time, I should be very unwilling to commence our operations by anything like a churlish course of procedure. I am therefore prepared to agree to that proposal, trusting, and I will say believing, that there will not be in any quarter of the House a disposition to give other than the fairest treatment to the measure now to be submitted. Sir, having said these few words, I have only to conclude with the Motion of which I have given Notice.

§ MR. R. N. FOWLER (LORD MAYOR)
said, he did not wish to trouble the House with any remarks on this measure at that time, as he should have opportunities of speaking on the Bill on its later stages. But he was in this position—that be held an office out of the House, which made him feel that he ought not to avail himself of the opportunities of addressing meetings on this great question which many of his hon. Friends enjoyed. He wished to state that when Mr. Speaker put the Question he should say "No" to it. At the time when the Question of the third reading of the Representation of the People Bill was put last Session, which the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister stated was agreed to nemine contradicente, he was hastening down to the House determined, if no one else did, to say "No" to the Question. The Prime Minister had stated that the negative of the hon. Member for South Leicestershire (Mr. Pell) was given inaudibly; but he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would do him the justice of believing that had he been present he would have said "No" in a voice loud enough to have reached the Chair. He wished, as a humble individual, to put it on record that this Bill was not brought in with his approval.

§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL
Sir, I beg to give Notice that, on the Motion being made for the second reading of the Bill, I shall move— That, in the opinion of this House, any measure purporting to provide for the better 238 Representation of the People in Parliament must be accompanied by provisions for a proper arrangement of electoral areas.

§ MR. RAIKES
said, be quite agreed that this was not an occasion for entering into debate on the Motion which the Prime Minister had made; but he must take exception to what the right hon. Gentleman also said—namely, that it was not an unusual or inconvenient time for introducing a measure of this kind. It appeared to him that, in a Session specially convoked for discussing this measure, it would have been more in accordance with the importance of the subject if the Motion had been made when the House commenced Business. He ventured to make his humble protest against the course taken by the Government in bringing it forward at 20 minutes past 12 o'clock. He would also express regret that the Prime Minister had not taken that opportunity of throwing any light upon certain remarkable disclosures which, within the last few days, had found their way into the public Press in connection with the measure of Redistribution. It was to have been hoped that the House would have had that night from Her Majesty's Government some further outline of their intentions with regard to that important question; and be, at all events, could only read in the silence of the right hon. Gentleman an additional confirmation of that attitude of non possumus which he had taken up with regard to this question in declining to satisfy the legitimate curiosity of the people.

§ MR. HEALY
said, he trusted that the Government would give more opportunity than last year, during the passage of the Bill, for the consideration of certain Amendments which hon. Members on those Benches had to move in reference to votes for the tenure of land. If it was the intention to send the Bill to the House of Lords in the same way as it was sent last Session, he was convinced that it would lead to a considerable loss of time.

§ LORD GEORGE HAMILTON
asked the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister whether this was the Bill as introduced last Session, or as it left the House?

MR. GLADSTONE
was understood to signify that it was the Bill as it left the House.