CLASS III.—LAW AND JUSTICE. (Hansard, 13 September 1886)

§ MR. DILLON: (Mayo, E.)
Surely it is not proposed to take this Vote tonight?

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Lord RANDOLPH CHURCHILL) (Paddington, S.)
It is proposed to postpone the contentious Irish Votes, and to proceed with the English Votes.

§ MR. DILLON
That would not be in accordance with the arrangement just arrived at. Several English Members below the Gangway on this (the Opposition) side of the House have come to us Irish Members to ask if the Irish Votes were likely to occupy the rest of the night. We have told them that they would, and I therefore do not think it fair, when those English Members have gone away, that we should take important English Votes in their absence.

§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL
The hon. Member cannot expect the Government to agree to such an arrange- 289 ment as that which he has brought forward, and which he alleges has been arrived at. We are most anxious to meet the legitimate views of hon. Members, and my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary for Ireland has agreed that the Vote which might be expected to give rise to some discussion shall be postponed until to-morrow, when it will be more convenient for hon. Members opposite to discuss it; but we obviously cannot meet the expectations of those hon. Members who think that the Government should at this hour stop all further progress with Supply. Our progress to-night has been extremely slow, and I do not think I am making an unreasonable demand on hon. Members when I ask them to proceed further with the Votes.

§ MR. DILLON
What are the Votes it is proposed to go on with? The Votes for Law Charges in England have all been passed.

§ MR. CONYBEARE (Cornwall, Camborne)
I think we have a right to protest against the course the Government propose. I know the noble Lord (Lord Randolph Churchill) is a master of surprises, so that nothing that he can do is likely very much to astonish any of us. I came here this evening under the fall idea and impression that we were to discuss the Irish Votes, and not the English Votes; and it is a very extraordinary thing that at this hour of the night we should be asked to turn our attention from what has been occupying it all the evening, and to go on with English Votes which we had been led to believe would not be taken. Many of us are not prepared to discuss, with a proper amount of care and attention, the English Votes which we did not expect to come on, and which are only brought before us now by surprise. This is another of those un-Constitutional practices to which the noble Lord is so partial. I must protest against his action; and, therefore, I will move to report Progress.

§ MR. J. O'CONNOR (Tipperary, S.)
I certainly am surprised at the course taken by the noble Lord, and the reason for that surprise is this. I remember when the noble Lord occupied a place on this Bench below the Gangway, and other noble Lords and Marquesses sat on the Bench he now occupies above the Gangway—["Order, order!"]

THE CHAIRMAN
The course the discussion is taking is altogether irregular. The Vote before the Committee is the first Vote in Class III.

Several hon. MEMBERS
No; Progress.

THE CHAIRMAN
The Vote has not been withdrawn. It is irregular to go on discussing the course the Government propose to take.

§ MR. CONYBEARE (Cornwall, Camborne)
I moved to report Progress.

THE CHAIRMAN
No; no such Motion reached me.

§ MR. CONYBEARE
I certainly moved to report Progress.

Several hon. MEMBERS
Yes; Progress.

THE CHAIRMAN
I did not put the Motion.

§ MR.CONYBEARE
I certainly moved it.

§ MR. JOHN MORLEY (Newcastle-on-Tyne)
It seems to me that the position of the Chancellor of the Exchequer does not appear to be an unreasonable one. I think, as the noble Lord indicated, we ought to be now prepared to get through a certain amount of Business so as to leave more time for discussion in the future upon those important Votes which are postponed and which are contentious. I would, therefore, suggest to my hon. Friend (Mr. Conybeare) that he would do well to withdraw his Motion.

§ MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.)
The Government say that the Vote before us is the first in Class III. I think the whole of the English Votes in Class III. have been voted. Is it the first Irish Vote that they propose to take?

§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Sir MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH) (Bristol, W.)
There is some mistake. We were not aware that the first Votes in Class III. had been taken, and that the first of the remaining Votes in that Class was that for Criminal Prosecutions in Ireland. We, therefore, propose to take the first Vote in Class IV.

§ MR. DILLON
And what is that?

An hon. MEMBER
Public Education in England.

§ MR. DILLON
To tell us that the Vote for Public Education in England, one of the largest and most important Votes on the Estimates, should be taken sub silentio, is most absurd. I must say that the Government have endeavoured to make a most singular bargain, and a most extraordinary feeling appears to prevail on the opposite Benches.

An hon. MEMBER
You have not the control of the House.

§ MR. DILLON
Someone over there says we have not the control of the House. That is perfectly true. But I wish to point out to the Committee, as I have already said, that some English Members came to us earlier in the evening and asked this question—whether or not we thought that the Irish Votes would occupy the whole of our time to-night? We, of course, answered in the affirmative, and that answer went round amongst hon. Members. As a mere matter of courtesy to these hon. Gentlemen who have gone home on the understanding that the Irish Votes would occupy the whole of the evening, I think we are bound to postpone these important English Estimates. It is a very common arrangement, as hon. Members know, to give each other information of this kind, as far as we can anticipate the course of proceeding on matters in which we are especially interested. We were notoriously within our knowledge in saying that if the Votes were taken as they were on the Paper, and discussed in the ordinary manner, the Irish Votes would consume the whole of the evening. Even if we had discussed them in a much more perfunctory manner than we have adopted these Irish Votes would naturally have consumed the whole of the evening. I maintain that it was a legitimate thing to tell English Members, when they applied to us, that the Irish Votes would consume the whole of the evening. We have given this information for the convenience of English Gentlemen; and they, therefore, went home under the impression that the English Education Vote could not come on until to-morrow.

§ MR. F. S. POWELL (Wigan)
I hope the Committee will allow me to remind them that already considerable discussion has taken place on the Vote for English Education. The right hon. Gentleman the late Vice President of the Council (Sir Lyon Playfair) made the 292 usual official statement in an extremely valuable speech, and one full of detail, in the late Session. The present Vice President also submitted his views, and other Members laid before the Committee facts and arguments in support of their opinions. I, therefore, do trust that the former discussion may be regarded as sufficient, and that this Vote may pass without discussion.

§ MR. J. O'CONNOR (Tipperary, S.)
I, to some extent, agree with the hon. Member who has just sat down. No doubt the late Vice President of the council (Sir Lyon Playfair) did make a very interesting statement. It was one to which I listened very attentively; but we must remember that that statement was not made in the Parliament now sitting. It was made in the late Parliament, and there are many new Members in this House who did not hear it, who have not read it, and who have come amongst us with totally different views with regard to education to those which were entertained by hon. Members who sat here last Session. Under the circumstances I think that facilities should be given to those hon. Members to discuss the question of English education at a time when their speeches will have effect. I think upon this matter they ought to be allowed to put themselves right with their constituency. I appeal to the noble Lord (Lord Randolph Churchill) to allow Progress to be reported. ["Order, order!"] I submit that I am in Order; but as I do not wish to come into conflict with the Chair I shall not continue the remarks I had intended to make. I wish to put myself right with the Chairman; and I wish to say that I distinctly heard the Motion for Progress made. In pursuing my argument in reference to that matter I do not think I am out of Order.

THE CHAIRMAN
The Motion was not put from the Chair.

§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR (Donegal, E.)
With regard to the Motion to report Progress, rather than proceed with the Votes in Class IV., I must say I am astonished at the condition of memory of the noble Lord (Lord Randolph Churchill). I would remind him that on two separate occasions I pointedly put questions to him, and to another right hon. Member of the Cabinet sitting on the Front Bench, as to the order in which these Votes were to be taken. 293 The noble Lord informed us that the Army Estimates would be taken first, the Navy Estimates next, and then the Civil Service Estimates in the order in which they appeared on the Paper. Trusting to that assurance, I, for one, have relied upon the Estimates being taken exactly in their proper order. So far was I from anticipating the possibility of Class IV. being taken this evening that I have not brought with me papers I had intended to use in regard to the case of a certain school in which I take some interest. I should not be able to do justice to the question in the absence of these papers. With regard to the second Vote in Class IV., it is within my knowledge that hon. Members who take considerable interest in technical education in Ireland have reserved themselves for another day, expecting that it would be impossible for Class IV. to be reached this evening. Under these circumstances it appears to me hardly fair that we should be asked suddenly to consider Estimates with regard to which we have not thought it necessary even to look at the papers. If any further Supply is to be taken, I trust that we shall proceed with the Votes as they are on the Paper. I am sorry that the pledges given by the Front Bench opposite are considered by right hon. Gentlemen opposite as so little binding upon the Government.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Lord RANDOLPH CHURCHILL) (Paddington, S.)
No doubt the Government have made a mistake in this matter, and it is one which they are not likely very soon to be guilty of again. They sought to consult the convenience of hon. Members opposite by postponing a certain Vote in which those hon. Members were interested. They believed that hon. Members opposite desired that Vote to come on at a convenient hour to-morrow. A request for the postponement of this Vote was made at half-past 12, and an arrangement was made in a space of time that did not cover more than a minute. It evidently was the intention of hon. Gentlemen opposite that these proceedings in Committee of Supply should come to a conclusion there and then; but that was certainly not the intention of the Government. Half-an-hour has now been taken up with frivolous discussion as to whether Committee of Supply should proceed or stop. Hon. 294 Members should be clear as to what their attitude is. An hon. Gentleman opposite has risen in his place and made a demand on the Government which is altogether unreasonable. ["No, no!"] Yes; that is the position taken up by the hon. Gentleman. The demand he makes, so far as the Government are concerned, it is impossible to comply with. We do not feel at all inclined to give way, without very strong protest, to a demand which appears to have another object than to prevent the Supplies of the year being voted with expedition and decency. As to what has fallen from the hon. Member for East Donegal (Mr. Arthur O'Connor)—namely, that he received an assurance from the Government that the Votes would be proceeded with in the order in which they appear upon the Paper, I must say that, although we entered into a contrary arrangement with the hon. Member's Friends just now, we very much regret it after what has happened. We did it to consult what we thought was the convenience of hon. Members opposite; but for the future we will be very careful not to take any Votes out of their order.

§ MR. SEXTON (Belfast, W., and Sligo, S.)
We understood that the Votes would be taken in a certain order. Certain Irish Members have, in reply to inquiries from English Members sitting not on one side of the House alone, but on both sides, informed them that the discussion of the Irish Votes would occupy the whole evening. If these English Members came down to-morrow and found that over £250,000 had been taken for education in England without discussion, they would have a perfect right to consider themselves ill-treated. I can understand the anxiety of the noble Lord (Lord Randolph Churchill) to get on with Supply. If any of us were in his position we should feel the same anxiety; but I would ask the noble Lord to look back upon the evening and to say whether, as a matter of fact, the progress we have made has been really so slow as to warrant all these comments? When you get 14 Votes, many of them highly contentious, it is only right to say that good progress has been made. Hon. Gentlemen on both sides of the House will confirm me when I say that to take 14 Votes of this kind in one evening is not a bad night's work. 295 As I said, I understand the anxiety of the noble Lord; but I think I may claim the right to say that in representing facts from the Front Bench opposite he ought to endeavour to make at least an approximate approach to accuracy. He says that the Government agreed to postpone certain Votes for our convenience. What happened was this. When the Vote for the Chief Secretary's Office was called on I rose and submitted to the Government whether they thought it would be convenient—["Oh, oh!"] Yes; those were my very words. I submitted to the Government whether they thought it would be convenient to go on with a Vote of this importance at such a late hour? I said that my hon. Friend the Member for Westmeath (Mr. Tuite) was willing, if they desired it, to enter upon the consideration of the Barbavilla case, and I appealed to the Leaders of the Government whether they considered that such a discussion should be taken at such an hour? Well, they evidently did not think it would be convenient. I did not; in fact, nobody did. A discussion of that kind once entered upon certainly could not be finished to-night, and no one would have gained anything by the arrangement. I put it to the noble Lord, therefore, whether the Irish Members did not appeal to the Government in a spirit, not impeding, but meant to facilitate the progress of Supply? ["Oh, oh!"] I put it to the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach). He rose and said that four Votes were not contentious. We gave way upon those Votes, and allowed the Government to take them without discussion. The noble Lord seems anxious to make a statement to the public. Well, he has made it; and I make mine. The action we took showed that we had no desire whatever to impede the Government; but that, so far as was consistent with the due discussion of Votes on which questions of great importance are to be raised, we were willing to give the Government, from now to the close of Supply, every reasonable facility for getting through the Business.

§ MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.)
I must say that the account given by the noble Lord (Lord Randolph Churchill) of what took place is extremely inaccurate. I do not mean to insinuate that it is wilfully inaccurate; but it is distinctly 296 wrong. What took place was this—and I am open to correction if I myself am inaccurate in the statement I make—but I wish to give my version of what transpired, seeing that the noble Lord has made a rather angry charge against us, a charge which I maintain is absolutely unfounded—the Chief Secretary got up and said the Government were willing to withdraw the contentious Irish Votes provided we allowed certain other Irish Votes which were named as Votes of an uncontentious character to be disposed of. That is exactly what took place. When the Votes were put one of them was found to be of a contentious character. We pointed out the fact, and the Chief Secretary, admitting the justice of our representation, assented to its postponement. Three Irish Votes were therefore taken without discussion, Nothing was said about the Votes in Class IV. What I complain of is this—that during the negotiations which passed across the floor of this House—and every hon. Member knows that I am stating the truth—three uncontentious Votes were disposed of without comment. Not one word of discussion took place upon them, and then the Government tried to spring upon us a number of Votes of which no mention had been made. I say it is unfair and unjust on the part of the noble Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer to turn round upon us and say that we have not acted loyally. I think, so far as the Irish Members are concerned, we have a right to resent such an accusation. It may suit the noble Lord to charge the Irish Members with Obstruction; but let him try it. We have not obstructed, and he is perfectly aware of the fact. He has shown us a good example in this respect. In former years I have sat here for many long hours whilst he has taught us the science and art of Obstruction, and perhaps the time may come when we may benefit by his teaching and follow in his footsteps. There is not the slightest reason why we should be bullied by charges of this kind when we have adhered most loyally to our part of the bargain. We certainly shall have to take a division against proceeding with the Vote before the Committee.

§ MR. CLANCY (Dublin Co., N.)
There are certain questions involved in the Votes in Class IV. in which I take 297 great interest. For instance, there is the question of the Science and Art Department. [Laughter.] Hon. Gentlemen opposite may laugh; perhaps they do not know that our Science and Art Department in Dublin is governed from London. Yes; it is. It is actually governed from London just as much as is any other Irish Department. Then this Vote for Public Education concerns a large number of Irish people in England; and while we Irish Members are here we are determined, so far as we can, to safeguard the interests of our fellow-countrymen in this country. I can only say, with reference to what has fallen from the hon. Member for Wigan (Mr. F. S. Powell), that I hope his constituency, to whom he has given the idea that he is a supporter of denominational education, will watch his conduct this evening, and see that, when an opportunity is offered for forwarding the cause of denominational education, he has taken the very reverse course, and has insisted on the Education Vote being taken as it stands on the Paper without discussion and comment. ["Order, order!"] If I am out of Order I presume the Chairman will correct me.

THE CHAIRMAN
The Question before the Committee is that I report Progress, and ask leave to sit again.

§ MR. CLANCY
I am willing to obey you, Sir; but I am not willing to obey the instructions of amateur Chairmen. I repeat that there are several questions on these Estimates that we are quite as much interested in as we are in Irish questions, expressly so called.

§ MR. CONWAY (Leitrim, N.)
I myself am very much interested in this question of education, and am prepared to bring forward several questions which I think will commend themselves to the Vice President of the Privy Council (Sir Henry Holland), if I have a fair opportunity of doing so. We to-night understood from the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach) that in giving way on these Votes which we have just passed, on one of which I had intended to speak—I have voluminous notes here which I had intended to use—I say that we understood in giving way that only Irish Votes would be dealt with. I am prepared to deal with the Education Question even now; but 298 it is only fair to take into consideration the interests of those English Members who have been led astray with regard to the action of the Committee to-night, and who have gone away believing that we should not proceed beyond the Irish Votes. These hon. Gentlemen would feel a serious grievance if no opportunity is given them of discussing such an important Vote as this for education. As to what has fallen from the hon. Member for Wigan (Mr. F. S. Powell), I would point out that last Session we had no opportunity of discussing the Education Question at all. ["Oh, oh!"] Hon. Gentlemen may say "Oh, oh!" but the "Oh, oh's!" were not here then. They know nothing about it. Where ignorance is bliss it is folly to be wise. A statement was made by a Minister of the Crown on the Education Estimates in the last Session of Parliament; but we who take an interest in the question were limited to one speech. The speeches made were so very few that they attracted no public attention at the time. Only some half-a-dozen Members spoke, and their remarks were mainly devoted to the subject of technical education. On the question of education as it stands we shall be able, if we have a proper opportunity, to enter into the particulars of the grievances we have in regard to the Science and Art Department and the ordinary school institution. The hon. Member for Wigan (Mr. F. S. Powell) knows right well that we had no opportunity of bringing up these matters in the last Parliament. No opportunity was allowed, and we depended upon the new Parliament for an opportunity being given to discuss the Votes at length. On this Education Vote I am prepared to ventilate other grievances, and there are other Gentlemen who are equally interested in the matter, and I appeal for them as well as for myself. I do protest against our being called upon at this late hour to discuss Votes of such importance, especially after the understanding which has been come to. The other day I was proud to bring forward a grievance with regard to denominational schools. There are particular cases in connection with that matter that I wish to bring forward on the Education Vote. I and others will be prepared to deal with these matters if the Government will give us a little time.

§ MR. SEXTON (Belfast, W., and Sligo, S.)
Does the noble Lord opposite (Lord Randolph Churchill) see any use in prolonging this discussion? Had we not much better go on with the Belfast Riots Bill, and pass it through Committee?

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Lord RANDOLPH CHURCHILL) (Paddington, S.)
The Government have their own idea of what is best for the convenience of the Committee, and certainly are not inclined to take any suggestion, after what has happened, from that quarter.

§ MR. DILLWYN (Swansea, Town)
I never remember important Votes like these in Class IV., which affect our constituencies so vitally, being entered upon at so late an hour as this. I heard what took place between the hon. Member for Belfast (Mr. Sexton) and the Chief Secretary for Ireland (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach), and there seemed to me to be a clear understanding between them that the three Irish Votes which have been passed should be taken without criticism. ["No, no!"] Yes; that was what I understood. We were to take the three Irish Votes which were not contentious, and then report Progress. I certainly think it would be very unfair to go on with the Education Votes, seeing that English Members have gone away on the understanding that these Votes would not be taken. I repeat that the Vote is one which materially affects the English constituencies.

§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Sir MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH) (Bristol, W.)
I thought the desire of the hon. Member for Swansea (Mr. Dillwyn) to promote progress in Supply would be the same whatever Government was in Office; but I appear to have been mistaken. I remember very different sentiments from those which have fallen from the hon. Gentleman being expressed by him when his own Party were in power. I distinctly deny that an understanding was entered into by me to the effect that Progress would be reported after the three uncontentious Irish Votes were passed. I never said anything of the kind; on the contrary, in assenting to what I understood to be the request of the hon. Member for Belfast (Mr. Sexton) that the Vote for the Chief Secretary's Office should not be proceeded with to-night, I asked hon. 300 Members to consent to take what I believed to be three or four unopposed Votes which would obviously not occupy time, and which as a matter of fact, did not occupy more than a minute in being put from the Chair. Then I went on to say that I apprehended that in no case would the Committee consent to report Progress at so early an hour as 20 minutes to 1 o'clock. ["No, no!"] I venture to say that it must have been obvious to the Committee that it was in my mind that we should proceed with other Votes after disposing of the three uncontentious Votes relating to Ireland. I had thought that Class III. would be taken, for I was not aware that the English Votes in that class had already been voted. But when the hon. Member for Swansea (Mr. Dillwyn) says that the Vote which it is proposed to proceed with is of an important character, and therefore ought not to be taken to-night, I would venture to remind him of the important statement made by the right hon. Gentleman the late Vice President of the Council (Sir Lyon Playfair). The Education Vote has already been discussed. I must say I am sorry I acceded to the request of the hon. Member for Belfast (Mr. Sexton), seeing the turn matters have taken. I did so with the view of promoting progress, but it seems to have had a contrary effect.

§ MR. SEXTON (Belfast, W., and Sligo, S.)
If the right hon. Gentleman thinks it desirable we are perfectly willing to go on with the Estimates in their proper order.

§ SIR MICHAEL HICKS - BEACH
The hon. Member for East Mayo (Mr. Dillon) repudiates the charge of Obstruction. I do not wish to say anything about Obstruction; but I will say this—that if we are to spend as much time on the Votes which have to come as we have spent in an absolutely useless discussion of the Vote for the Lord Lieutenant's Household, it will be a very long time before we are fortunate enough to arrive at the close of the present Session.

§ MR. T. P. O'CONNOR (Liverpool, Scotland)
I do not wonder at the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland refraining from all reference to Obstruction, because I suppose he wishes to spare the blushes of the noble Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Lord Randolph Churchill). I am surprised 301 at the argument which has come from the hon. Member for Wigan (Mr. F. S. Powell). He says that the Education Vote does not require discussion, because the late Vice President of the Council (Sir Lyon Playfair) made a long statement on the subject in the last Parliament. Surely the hon. Gentleman is not forgetful of the fact that the statement to which he refers was made by an ex-Minister in a dead Parliament. Does the hon. Gentleman mean to say that the present Parliament is exactly the same as the last Parliament? I was not particularly in love with the last Parliament; but I must say that I looked upon it as a good deal better than the present Parliament. Certainly there is a very great difference in its constituent elements, [Laughter]. Yes; that, no doubt, affords gratification to hon. Gentlemen opposite; but it affords equal satisfaction to hon. Gentlemen on these Benches. But their gratification and our satisfaction are founded upon the state of facts—namely, that this Parliament is different from the last, and that any statement of a Minister in the last Parliament is not to be taken as in any sense binding upon the present Parliament. I must say that the friends and supporters of the last Government on the Education Question would be more than astonished if they found that a demand made at half-past 1 in the morning that an opportunity should be given for the adequate discussion of the Education Vote had been refused, and that the discussion had been shelved for a Session. The constituencies at the last Election would have been very much surprised if they had known that on the first opportunity the Tory Party had of discussing the Education Question they would take the course of endeavouring to smuggle the Vote through without comment by what I will call a stratagem, because I do not like to call it a trick. I protest in the strongest manner to the addition which the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland has made to his original statement. I am sure that no one could intend less than I to cast any aspersion on the bona fides of the right hon. Gentleman. I was not present when he made his statement; and, therefore, I am not going to give an account of what happened on my own authority. Hon. Gentlemen appear 302 to be unaware that it is customary for an hon. Member to stand up in this House and express the views of hon. Gentlemen with whom he is acting. Well, all my hon. Friends agree that what the right hon. Baronet (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach) believes he said, and what he may have wished to say, he really did not say. None of my hon. Friends have any recollection of his saying that he hoped the Committee would not report Progress at five minutes to 1 o'clock. The understanding was that if these non-contentious Irish Votes which had been referred to were passed, and the Vote for the Chief Secretary's Office passed over, Progress would be reported. It was on these terms that my hon. Friends abstained from debating the three Irish Votes that were passed; but, in spite of their having performed their part of the engagement, up got the Government and sprang upon them a new Class containing one of the most important Votes in the whole Estimates. Now, Sir, fortunately, we Irishmen are not fighting alone in this matter. The hon. Gentleman sitting below me (Mr. Dillwyn), who is so high an authority on the Order of this House and the Procedure of this House, joins with us in stating that this Education Vote is one in which a large number of Members in all quarters of the House consider of the highest importance. Well, a great number of Members, as has already been pointed out, have already gone away, not anticipating for a moment that the Education Votes would be reached. Hon. Members went away after putting questions on this subject to my hon. Friends. ["No, no!"] Hon. Gentlemen opposite seem to have no hesitation in casting doubt upon the statement of one of the most honourable men in the House. Let them get up and say that they do not believe my hon. Friend (Mr. Dillon), if they think it decent to do so. My hon. Friend has distinctly made the statement that several hon. Gentlemen have gone away—["Name, name!"] I would suggest to the noble Lord opposite that for the sake of decency, and to save himself from that which would be a subject of future regret, he should abstain from casting doubt upon the veracity of my hon. Friend (Mr. Dillon). [Renewed cries of "Name!"] If hon. Gentlemen 303 are to be interrupted by these—I am at a loss for a word—these noisy demonstrations, then all decent discussion is at an end. My hon. Friend said that several Liberal Members had gone away under the impression that the Education Votes could not be taken to-night. Would it not be a singular thing and a surprising thing to these hon. Gentlemen to find that in their absence, at this hour of the morning, the Committee were plunged into one of the most interesting controversies which can take place within these walls? If the noble Lord opposite (Lord Randolph Churchill) wishes to enter upon a career of bulldozing and brow-beating the Committee, I can promise him that the heroic spirit that he himself practised for five years on the Bench below me has not been lost upon us.

§ MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.)
On behalf of myself and my Friends, I wish to say that, whatever feeling the Government may profess to entertain with regard to our action, it is outrageously untrue to charge us with disloyalty to our engagements. It was monstrous to say that we have been guilty of any disloyalty in this transaction. The right hon. Baronet the Chief Secretary for Ireland said he would withdraw the contentious Irish Votes in order to make Progress. Those Votes were accordingly postponed in order that three other Votes might be taken. These we immediately gave him. There was no further understanding as to what should be done after that. I do not state that he or any other Member of the Government gave us to understand that after that Progress would be reported. I say that frankly. But, on the other hand, he never said one word that reached our ears that he would not report Progress. I fully understood that the Government did intend to report Progress. What occurred after that transaction? Why, the Government have clearly shown that they did not look ahead at all. Let them remember what has occurred. Class II. being disposed of, one would have thought that the Government would have looked ahead; but they proposed to take Class III., the first Vote of which is for "Criminal Prosecutions and other Law Charges in Ireland." I, of course, got up and protested against that Vote being taken, and the Government at once ad- 304 mitted that it was another contentious Irish Vote. I say they did not look ahead, and no one on the Government Bench knew what was about to be done. They had to hold a hurried consultation, and when they found that all the Votes in Class III. were contentious they passed on to Class IV. I submit that that is not the way to do business at a quarter to 1 in the morning. I say, even they themselves did not know that this Education Vote was coming on. On the face of it, it is clear that they could not originally have intended to bring on for discussion at this hour of the morning a subject which is decidedly of the greatest importance, and a subject upon which in the present Parliament not a single syllable has yet been said. The course proposed is preposterous; and I say, if the noble Lord (Lord Randolph Churchill) thinks he is going to frighten us by hinting at Obstruction, he is very much mistaken in the effect it is likely to produce.

§ MR. CONYBEARE (Cornwall, Camborne)
It was I who moved the Motion to report Progress, and I wish to say a word—[Cries of "Divide, divide!" and interruption.] I wish to point out—[Cries of "Agreed!" and continued interruption.] When hon. Gentlemen opposite have finished I will go on. I was going to point out that, whatever may be the merits of this agreement with the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the Chief Secretary for Ireland and hon. Members who came from Ireland, that agreement does not bind us who are English Radicals. We come here, as I have had occasion before to remark, in the fulfilment of our duty. One of the most important duties we have to fulfil is to look after the interests of our constituents in regard to this matter of education. Education is one of the most important questions that can come before the House; and when we are asked to vote money at this hour of the morning amidst an exhibition of childish impatience—when I see we are asked to vote away more than £1,000,000, which represents an enormous proportion of the total Education Vote, I think it is quite time that we insisted on Progress being reported. [Cries of "Agreed!" "Divide!" and continued interruption.] I say without the slightest hesitation that in face of the persistent interruption of hon. Gentlemen opposite no 305 decent progress can be made. There are many of us who did not have an opportunity of taking part in the discussion of the Education Estimates in the late Parliament on the statement of the Vice President of the Council (Sir Lyon Playfair), although we had many important questions to raise and many important matters to discuss. I am glad to agree with the noble Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the point he has put before the Committee. He has expressed his desire of seeing these Votes passed with expedition and decency. We are desirous of seeing them passed with decency, and if decency can be had together with expedition all the better for us. All I can say is that neither decency nor expedition is likely to be served by exhibitions of angry feeling on the part of Gentlemen on the opposite Benches. I have only one word more to say, and it is this—if the Chancellor of the Exchequer thinks he is going to get this Vote passed to-night he is mistaken, for it will not be passed.

§ MR. P. J. POWER (Waterford, E.)
I desire to say that the remarks which the Chancellor of the Exchequer states that he addressed to the Committee did not reach this portion of the House. I think the position taken up by the Government is more than unreasonable. They have already taken 14 Votes for Ireland and Scotland, and I can assure hon. Gentlemen who have had but a short experience in this House that to obtain that number of Votes in the evening is very good work. If the noble Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer will go back to the time when he sat on these Benches below the Gangway, and when he was a thorn in the side of Sir Stafford Northcote, he will recollect that one Vote at a Sitting was considered sufficient. I say that the programme of to-night has been adhered to. We understood that when certain uncontested Votes were taken we were to report Progress; and we contend that the Vote which the Government are now seeking to take is, perhaps, one of the most contentious on the Paper. It is one in which Irish Members have a very great interest, and in which the people of Ireland have a strong interest; and I assure the Government that it is one in the discussion of which we intend to take an active part. The Government will perceive 306 from the attitudes of some of their followers that the Committee is not in a proper frame of mind to go to-night into this complicated matter, which will require for its consideration more coolness than is likely to be displayed on the opposite Benches. Be that as it may, we are determined that the Government shall not proceed with the Vote until we have exhausted all the Forms of the House to prevent it.

§ MR. BIGGAR (Cavan, W.)
The Committee will be aware that in the Parliament of 1880 we had some experience of late Sittings; but in the Parliament of 1874–80 half-past 12 o'clock was looked upon as the proper time for reporting Progress. It was then understood that Supply should not be continued after 1 o'clock in the morning; and I do not think the noble Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer has any right to make a very strong protest against alleged Obstruction, seeing that no Motion to report Progress was made until half-past 12 tonight. In addition to that I may say that I recollect that on one occasion the Scotch Fishery Vote occupied the whole of the Sitting; at any rate, the debate was very prolonged. But to-night the discussion on the Fishery Vote has been confined entirely to Scotch Members. Well, Sir, taking the matter for all in all, I think that the number of Votes obtained by the Government ought to satisfy the noble Lord. The last Vote was eminently one for discussion, and I do not think it can be said that we have discussed it at any great length. It is unreasonable to tell us, under the circumstances, that we are to go on with a Vote of a very contentious kind at half-past 1 in the morning.

§ MR. SEXTON (Belfast, W., and Sligo, S.)
I think hon. Members on both sides of the House will agree that the Chairman is as likely to draw a correct conclusion as to what was said as any Member of the House. You will recollect, Mr. Courtney, that you put from the Chair the Question that you should report Progress.

§ MR. MOLLOY (King's Co., Birr)
Several of my hon. Friends have left the House on the understanding that this Vote would not be proceeded with; and I am sure that if any one of them had had the slightest idea that this important question would come on, he would have remained to take part in the discussion. 307 My hon. Friend the Member for Poplar (Mr. Buxton), believing that there was no more important Business to come on, went away, and I am certain that it never entered into his mind that this important Vote would be taken. I appeal to the Government as to whether it is fair, in the absence of Members more intimately acquainted with education even than the Government themselves, to bring on a Vote which these hon. Members can have no opportunity of discussing? I do not think it fair that the Education Vote should be brought forward.

§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR (Donegal, E.)
Before we go into the Lobby for the first of what may be a long series of divisions, I appeal to the noble Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer to say whether it would not be more conducive to the dignity of the House and to our own convenience to settle this question without going into the Lobby at all? It is desirable that we should not perambulate the Lobbies for an hour, or an hour and a-half, to settle this dispute; because that is what will undoubtedly happen unless the Government agree to report Progress. But there is no reason why it should happen. The right hon. Baronet the Chief Secretary for Ireland has told us that he made an announcement to the Committee, having in his own mind a clear understanding of what the intention of the Government was. The statement of the right hon. Baronet is, to my mind, sufficient; but I am quite satisfied that hon. Members on these Benches did not hear it, and did not come to the same understanding. I appeal to the memory of hon. Members of this and of the last Parliament whether there is any more fruitful cause of dissension than these so-called "understandings?" The reason of this is to be found always in some departure from the recognized position. Now, the understanding we had was that the Votes were to be taken seriatim in the order in which they appeared on the Paper. The Government asked to be allowed to take one or two non-contentious Votes, and these we allowed to be taken; then a departure from that position occurred, the Government proposing to go on to Class IV.; but it certainly was never in the mind of Members on either side of the House that this Vote should be proceeded with. 308 Under these circumstances, you cannot get a very considerable section of the House to enter upon the consideration of the Education Estimates; and even if you try, you will do nothing more than walk about the Lobby for an hour and a-half, at the end of which time everyone will be thoroughly disgusted with the proceedings. There is an easy way of avoiding this. ["No, no!"] I suggest that the Vote put from the Chair—namely, the first Vote of Class IV.—should be withdrawn, and that we should recur to the Vote which we ought to have taken up according to arrangement.

§ MR. J. NOLAN (Louth, N.)
The noble Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer has made repeated charges of Obstruction against Members on this side of the House. Now, I respectfully submit that the charge of Obstruction cannot be brought against me, inasmuch as I have not ventured to address the Committee throughout the evening. I have listened to the very temperate addresses made by my Colleagues to the Leader of the House, and also to the appeal made to him by one of the oldest and most respected Members of this Assembly. A deaf ear has been turned to these appeals; and I venture to say with all respect, no matter what the consequence may be, that I, for one, am determined to persist to the end in the present opposition to the Government. I protest against hon. Members being forced to enter upon the consideration of a most important Vote in an undignified manner. I think we may safely appeal to the feelings of right hon. Gentlemen opposite to put an end now to what otherwise is likely to be a very prolonged discussion, and one which is likely to degenerate into an unseemly wrangle. Hon. Members opposite have not displayed during the past hour that feeling which would lead us to expect that they would give a fair, calm, and impartial consideration to the Vote which the Government wish to bring on. As my hon. Friend has stated, the question of education is not a purely English question; it is one in which the Irish Members take a very deep interest. I have been for years engaged in the work of education in this country, and I know that there are hundreds and thousands of Irishmen in England, the education of whose children is a thing 309 which is very dear to them; and, with the exception, perhaps, of my hon. Friend the Member for the Scotland Division of Liverpool (Mr. T. P. O'Connor), there is no Representative in the House to put forward their views. For these reasons I unite with my Colleagues in their appeal to the Government to allow the Business to come to a close.

§ MR. DEASY (Mayo, W.)
I am sorry to see that the noble Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer appears to be about to leave the House. It must be patent to everyone who has had experience in matters of this kind that it is useless to prolong the present discussion in opposition to the large number of Members who support the Motion before the Committee. Suppose we were to give way on the question and allow the Education Vote to be discussed, what would be the consequence? There would be very few Gentlemen on this side of the House who would not have many observations to make. Irish Members are deeply interested in this question. A great number of us have been through England during the last Election, and we know from actual contact with Irishmen in this country that there are many grievances which they desire to have redressed. I may remind the Committee that my hon. Friend the Member for King's County (Mr. Molloy) has given the names of Gentlemen—Members of the Royal Commission—who have left the House, but were very anxious to speak upon this Vote. It is evident that many English Members above the Gangway have also this question at heart. For myself, I take a very deep interest in the Education Question, and I shall certainly have something to say on the subject if I have the opportunity; but at this hour none of us can agree that this is a proper opportunity, and we think, on the other hand, that we cannot reasonably be expected to sit here till 7 o'clock in the morning, which will be the case if the Government choose to keep us. I, therefore, appeal to the Government to make no attempt to force on the discussion of the Education Vote. I remember that in one Session the discussion on the Lord Lieutenant's Household occupied the entire night, but on this occasion it has not occupied more than an hour and a half; and with regard to other Votes I may say that the consideration of the Vote for the Board of Works and other 310 similar matters might reasonably have occupied more time than has been expended upon them to-day. I must say that if we had understood the Chief Secretary to make the statement which he alleges he did make in the course of his speech, we should have taken a very different course with regard to three of the Votes which have been passed. I think that the progress made to-night in taking 13 Scotch, English, and Irish Votes, including one most important Irish Vote, ought to satisfy the ambition of hon. Gentlemen opposite. We are not anxious to remain here—on the contrary, we are quite as alive to the desirability of getting home as other Members of the House. We may not have quite the same inducements; but, at the same time, we have a great deal to do in Ireland, and after a very long and laborious Session we are entitled to have a long rest, and that rest will be quite as much needed by us as by Gentlemen opposite. I can assure the Committee that the Education Vote, when it does come forward, will be discussed point by point. If we bring it on now it is clear that Gentlemen opposite are not in a position to discuss it in a temperate and proper manner. The scenes we have witnessed for the last hour have had the effect of placing us in a state of mind by no means conducive to the proper consideration of the Vote. The word "Obstruction" has been hurled at us freely. I am bound to say that we have had no intention whatever of obstructing the Business of the House. We desire nothing more than a full and open discussion of a question in which we take a deep interest, and we have certainly not pushed our opposition to an improper length. ["Oh, oh!"] I would ask hon. Members to go back and say what time this Vote would have occupied in a former Session of Parliament, more especially under the conduct of the noble Lord when he sat on these Benches. I do not think there are any grounds whatever for charging us with Obstruction; and certainly, as far as I am concerned, I repudiate the idea that I have made any attempt in this or any other Session to obstruct the Business of the House. It seems to me quite right that we should take any steps that may be necessary to prevent any further progress in the Estimates being made to-night. We were first told to consider Class III., 311 but this was changed, and we were then I told to go on with Class IV. It appears to me that the Government did not know what Class to go on with, and I am sure that had they known at the time that the Education Vote was the first of the Class they would have agreed to Progress being reported. But they have got into a line, and they are determined to keep to it.

§ MR. TOMLINSON (Preston)
I rise to Order, and wish to ask whether the hon. Member is speaking to the Motion before the Committee?

THE CHAIRMAN
The hon. Member is very discursive in his remarks, and I must invite him to be more precise.

§ MR. DEASY
I wish to impress upon the minds of hon. Members opposite that their interruptions will not have the effect of advancing the Business of the Committee. I shall conclude by expressing a hope that on no consideration will the Vote which the noble Lord wishes to be taken be given to the Government to night, and, if for no other reason, because the Committee is not in a condition to discuss it in a proper spirit.

§ MR. YERBURGH (Chester)
I think it must be very evident to hon. Gentlemen who have listened to the remarks made on both sides of the House that there is a misunderstanding in this case. It is clear to me that right hon. Gentlemen on the Treasury Bench have put forward an arrangement which in some way has been misunderstood. There is an entire misunderstanding between the Government and hon. Gentlemen opposite, and I would appeal to both sides whether it is not possible for some understanding to be arrived at.

§ MR. J. O'CONNOR (Tipperary, S.)
I beg to move, Mr. Courtney, that you do now leave the Chair.

§ MR. HUNTER (Aberdeen, N.)
I beg to move, Sir, that you do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again. It is now 24 minutes past 2 o'clock, and it cannot be expected that at such an hour we should pass on to the discussion of such an important subject as the English Education Estimates. I am one of those who consider that the Committee would best consult its own dignity and the advantage of the country if it adjourned not later than half-past 12 o'clock every night, and I am quite prepared to join every League that may be established for early closing. It seems to me that it is most unreasonable to expect those of us who are private Members, and are not, like the Government, paid for their attendance, to remain until the small hours of the morning—those of us, particularly, who have to get up in the morning to do our own private work. I trust the Government will be reasonable, and will come to the conclusion which I think every reasonable man should come to—namely, that half-past 2 o'clock in the morning is not the time to begin the discussion of important Estimates.

§ COLONEL NOLAN (Galway, N.)
I would appeal to the noble Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer not to persist in his refusal to allow Progress to be reported. He said earlier in the evening that he would not allow Progress to be reported without making a strong protest. Well, he has made a strong protest. He has taken two divisions, and has been supported by a considerable majority. ["Hear, hear!"] I quite allow it. No less than 150 Members have stayed with the Government, all Conservatives; but the noble Lord will allow that there is a formidable minority, and that for 55 Gentlemen to be kept together at so late an hour in order to resist what they conceive to be an inconsiderate method of dealing with important Estimates is a most unusual thing. The noble Lord may choose to keep us here until 5 or 6 o'clock in the morning; but he must remember that he is dealing with Scotch and English Members as well as Irish Members, and that they do not think that British Esti- 313 mates ought to be dealt with at half-past 2 o'clock in the morning. ["Oh, oh!"] Well, there may be some English and Scotch Members who would like to go on with Supply; but, as I say, there are others who do not think that such matters should be proceeded with at half-past 2 in the morning. My opinion is—though, perhaps, it is not worth very much—that the view of the 55 Members is worth more than of the 154. I maintain that it is no use continuing this wrangle, and that nothing is likely to come of it beyond the keeping of us out of bed two or three hours longer. Enough has already taken place to inspire the Conservative papers—["Oh, oh!"]—yes, they will all be able to write upon it to-morrow. The whole of this thing has been got up in order that to-morrow the Conservative papers may write that the Irish Members are offering undue opposition to the Estimates. ["Hear, hear!"] Hon. Gentlemen opposite bear me out. Well, but we are not opposing the Estimates, nor have we been doing so. We have only been insisting upon the proper consideration of them; and I think such of the newspapers as are not blinded by their prejudices will say that, on the whole, there is a good deal to be said in favour of not proceeding with the Education Estimates at half-past 2 o'clock in the morning. I would point out to the noble Lord that he will not strengthen his protest by taking more than two divisions. Whether he takes six or two, it will come absolutely to the same thing.

§ GENERAL GOLDSWORTHY (Hammersmith)
As an independent Member sent here to represent my constituents, and to assist in carrying on the Business of the country—["Hear, hear!" and laughter]—I must protest against the proceedings of this evening. No doubt, half-past 2 o'clock is not a reasonable hour at which to begin the consideration of the Education Estimates; but I must say that half-past 12 was, under the circumstances of the present Session, a very reasonable hour. Hon. Members have been wasting time since half-past 12 o'clock. ["Hear, hear!"] I cannot consider that any good would be served by dividing the House because the Chief Secretary for Ireland did not know the name of a subordinate in one of the offices. Yet 314 this was proposed by the hon. Member for the Camborne Division of Cornwall (Mr. Conybeare). I wonder if the hon. Member is acquainted with the name of the housekeeper in the office to which he referred. Unnecessary delay has taken place, simply because certain hon. Gentlemen below the Gangway on the Opposition side have made arrangements with other Members occupying seats on the same side that certain Estimates shall not be taken. They have practically done that. Practically, then, the arrangement of the Business of this House is to rest with hon. Gentlemen opposite, rather than with the noble Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I myself am prepared to stop here to any hour which may be considered necessary as a protest against the waste of time which has taken place this evening. The hon. Member who last spoke—[An hon. MEMBER: Hon. and gallant.]—yes; the hon. and gallant Member who last spoke—I give him the "gallant" willingly, for we served together some years ago. He said that the remarks on some of the Estimates had not been unreasonable. I say that those remarks were unreasonable, because, as hon. Gentlemen opposite have desired to commence consideration of debateable matter at that hour when it suited them, I hold that the majority ought to rule the minority. I hope that will always be the case, especially where the majority is so large as it is on the present occasion.

§ MR. KIMBER (Wandsworth)
Mr. Courtney, I beg to call your attention to Standing Order No. 11, which is in these terms— If Mr. Speaker, or the Chairman of a Committee of the Whole House, shall be of opinion that a Motion for the Adjournment of a Debate, or of the House during any debate, or that the Chairman do report Progress, or do leave the Chair, is an abuse of the Rules of the House, he may forthwith put the Question thereupon from the Chair, and to ask your opinion whether, as Chairman of this Committee—["Order!"]—I think I am in Order, Mr. Courtney, in asking your opinion as to whether, having regard to the way in which the last two hours have been consumed, and to the fact that the present Motion is the third of the same kind that has been made within the last two hours, this Motion is not an abuse of the Rules of the House?

§ MR. T. P. O'CONNOR (Liverpool, Scotland)
On the point of Order I would like to ask you whether the plain meaning and spirit of that Rule is that the Chairman of Committees shall form that opinion of his own motion and initiative; and I would like, further, to ask you whether, if any suggestion be made to the Chairman of Committees on a question like this, it should not come from a Minister of the Crown?

THE CHAIRMAN
Order, order! The observations of the hon. Member (Mr. T. P. O'Connor) are out of Order. Neither is it a question of Order to ask the Chairman what his opinion may be as to what transpires in this House.

§ MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.)
The hon. and gallant Gentleman (General Goldsworthy) who has just addressed the Committee before this disorderly interruption took place gave it as his opinion that in all cases the majority in this House should rule the minority. Now, if that doctrine had always been put into force no reform would ever have taken place in this country, because I never heard of any reform or change being made without its first of all being advocated by a minority. ["Question!"] The question is, whether our position was a reasonable one when this wrangle was started? ["No!"] I say it was. I say it was a position assumed in good faith, and according to what we understood to be an agreement; and, furthermore, laying aside that altogether, I maintain that the hour at which the proposition to report Progress was made from these Benches was not an unreasonable hour to make such a Motion. Hon. Members have totally misrepresented the position which we took up. My hon. Friend the Member for West Belfast (Mr. Sexton) said to the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland—["Agreed, agreed!"] We have not agreed. My hon. Friend told the Chief Secretary for Ireland that we were quite prepared to go on with certain Irish Votes if the Government thought it was convenient. The Government said they did not consider it was convenient. The hon. Member for West Belfast distinctly said we were prepared to go on with these Votes if it was convenient; but the Government got up and said—"No; we admit that it is not a suitable time of the night to enter on so important a discussion as that for Law Charges in Ireland; but 316 we consider that if we postpone this Vote we are entitled to ask for the assistance of hon. Members in taking three Votes," which were named. We accepted that arrangement, and, so far as we are concerned, it has been honourably carried out. I maintain, therefore, it is preposterous to charge us with any failure to carry out the agreement which was arrived at. The hon. and gallant Gentleman (General Goldsworthy), who was particularly inflamed, seemed to think that we claimed to regulate the Business of the House; he said that we had made an arrangement with English Members. Now, nothing could be more distant from the real facts of the case. The hon. and gallant Gentleman is a new Member of the House; but any Gentleman who has sat for any considerable length of time during discussions in Committee of Supply knows perfectly well that nothing is more common than for one class of Members interested in one class of Votes to come to others and ask the question—"Can you tell us whether your discussion will occupy the whole night or not?" These exchanges are the ordinary courtesies of the House. What happened to-night was this—a number of English Members came to us and said—"Do you believe the Irish Votes will occupy the whole of this evening?" We said we did believe they would. The hon. and gallant Gentleman is quite wrong in supposing that we regulate the Business of the House; it is not we who regulate the Business—

§ MR. DE LISLE (Leicestershire, Mid)
Mr. Courtney, I beg to ask you whether the hon. Gentleman is not guilty of tedious repetition?

THE CHAIRMAN
Order, order! That is not a point of Order at all.

§ MR. DILLON
The hon. and gallant Gentleman (General Goldsworthy) accused us of undertaking to regulate the Business of this House. We have not undertaken for a single moment to regulate the Business of this House; but we did understand that the Business of the House had been regulated by the Government, and upon their regulation we relied when we endeavoured to give information to English Members, which I have now learned for the first time is to be considered a crime in this House—when we endeavoured to give information to English Members, what we 317 relied upon was the regulation by the Government of the Business of this House. We had frequently asked the Government what was the order in which they would take Supply, and they had always replied that they would take it in the order in which the Votes appeared on the Paper. Now, I want to impress on the Committee what the effect of that statement was. The Government, as I have already pointed out, had stated that they proposed to take Supply in the order in which it was placed on the Paper. Now, nobody can deny that fact; it was stated over and over again by the Government. When they stated that they would withdraw a certain contentious Irish Vote if we consented to take the remaining Votes in Class II, we were entitled to suppose they would go on with Class III. They commenced with the first Vote in that Class, and it was not until I protested against Class III being taken that they hopped on to Class IV. I put it to the Government whether that is a business-like way of carrying on the Business of Supply; is it a mode by which order and decency can be maintained?—["Yes!"] I say that it is not a way in which order and decency can be maintained. If you commence by trying to take one large Class of Estimates, and then, when a protest is made against one of the Votes, skip over 20 Votes and hop on to another Class, it is manifest that the proceeding will end in confusion. If the Government desire to carry on the Business of this House as it has been carried on during the whole of last week and this evening—namely, in a way which is satisfactory to the country—[Laughter.] Hon. Members laugh at my statement; but I would refer them to a leading article in the London Times of last Saturday, a paper not over favourable to us, in which The Times declare that Supply has been carried on in a perfectly fair and legitimate way. I do not think that The Times is doing us more than justice, and therefore I am justified in saying that the Business of Supply has been carried on in a way to satisfy the London Times. If the Government desire to carry on Supply in a fair and honourable spirit, they certainly ought to treat us with more courtesy than they have treated us to-night. The beginning of this trouble arose, as I contend, from a departure from the under- 318 standing which we loyally kept; we loyally adhered to the agreement, so far as we understood it and heard it; and for the distinct attack made upon us by the noble Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Lord Randolph Churchill) there is not one shred of justification. I regret exceedingly the condition into which things have got. While it is perfectly true that in all great matters the majority in this House must prevail over the minority, I must say that in all my experience—and it is very considerable—I never have seen an attempt on the part of a majority, so small as the present is as compared with the present minority, to bear down the minority by brute force in such an unreasonable way as it has been attempted to be done tonight. I have seen minorities in this House of 5 to 1 stand up with less cause and win. In this instance you are not 3 to 1, and the majority is made up, with the exception of five or six hon. Gentlemen, from Members on one side of the House.

THE CHAIRMAN
I wish to correct a misapprehension which has arisen as to the Business before the Committee. It is not the fact that the Education Vote is before the Committee, though it is proposed to go on with it—the Irish Vote was never formally withdrawn; that is the Vote before the Committee on which the Motion was made to report Progress.

§ MR. CONWAY (Leitrim, N.)
There is one lesson to be deduced from the proceedings of this evening, and that is that the constituencies of Great Britain will know upon whose shoulders the responsibility for the present state of affairs rests. Sir, I know many of the constituencies in the North of England—

THE CHAIRMAN
Order, order! The hon. Member must remember that the Motion before the Committee is to report Progress, and that he must confine his observations to that Motion.

§ MR. CONWAY
I wish to point out that we have been asked to discuss the Education Vote, and that hon. Gentlemen have been returned to this House on the question of education. Many hon. Gentlemen obtained the Irish Votes on the understanding that they would look particularly to this Vote. I see many hon. Members opposite who were sent to this House on the under- 319 standing that they would give their heartiest support to denominational education—

THE CHAIRMAN
The hon. Member is not confining his observations, as he must, to the Motion to report Progress.

§ MR. CONWAY
With regard to this Vote, Sir, am I not in Order in referring to the Education Vote, which there has been an attempt to take?

THE CHAIRMAN
It is irregular to refer to that Vote at all.

§ MR. CONWAY
With regard to the Motion to report Progress, I will point out that it is the Vote for Education that blocks the way.

THE CHAIRMAN
I have told the hon. Gentleman twice that he must not discuss the Education Vote, but must keep himself to the Question before the Committee.

§ MR. T. P. O'CONNOR (Liverpool, Scotland)
It is somewhat significant of the state of confusion to which the Committee has been reduced by this discussion that we require to be reminded by you, Mr. Courtney, what the Vote is which is really before us for discussion. I wish to say that nearly every hon. Member of the Committee was under the impression for the last two hours that the Vote before the Committee was that for education. [" No!"] Well, hon. Gentlemen on the opposite Benches give a negative to that statement; but I repeat the statement. Every Member of the Committee, without distinction of Party, whether on the Conservative Benches or—["No, no!"] Well, if my statement be contradicted before I make it, it shows the state of intelligence and impartiality in which hon. Members on the opposite Benches are. Now, Mr. Courtney, I will attempt once more to make my statement. My statement is that every Member of the Committee, without distinction of Party, whether on the Conservative or the Liberal Benches, was under the impression that the Vote before the Committee was the Vote for English Education—["No!"] Well, all I can say is this—that when we were discussing the Vote before the Committee, and discussing it as the Education Vote, not a single Member on those Benches corrected us. Hon. Gentlemen opposite cannot boast that they were particularly modest in the cries in which they indulged, and therefore it is not too 320 much to suppose that had hon. Gentlemen known the Education Vote was not before the Committee they would have corrected us. Now, Mr. Courtney, we are surely not now in a position to conduct with decency, decorum, and dignity the Business of Supply. I do not make any appeal to the Government. I regret to say that it appears to me that debates of this kind in Committee will not, so long as the present Chancellor of the Exchequer (Lord Randolph Churchill) is Leader of the House, be conducted in a spirit of mutual concession. The noble Lord has, for the first time in the history of the Leadership of this House, thought discourtesy a good mode of expediting Supply—[Cries of "Withdraw!"] I have not the smallest objection to withdraw the observation, though I think it is more than justified by the circumstances. We met the Government to-night in a perfectly fair spirit—we met them with fairness and impartiality, which, I think, might well have been imitated by some of the right hon. Gentlemen on the Treasury Bench. They made an offer; we accepted that offer—we carried out the offer; the Government broke the offer. The Government asked for four Votes; we gave them three of the Votes without a word of discussion, without a moment's delay; and when we had done that the gratitude and fair play of the Government was to forget their own promises, to swallow their own pledges, and even to try and force down the throats of the Committee one of the most important Votes in the whole Estimates. The country will judge between the Government and us. I think it will be seen that the Government are trying to make a case for themselves. They have no idea and no intention of carrying any further Votes in Committee to night; they are making a sham demonstration; they rely upon the ignorance of the outside public in closely watching the course of the proceedings in this House to lay the blame, not on the shoulders of the Government where it really lies, but on our shoulders. I am glad to think that when the case comes before the public the Government will not be able to represent this as a case of purely Irish Obstruction. We have been supported by the most able and the most experienced Members of the Liberal Party—["Oh, Oh!" laughter, and cries of Name!"]—men who were in- 321 telligent and honoured Members of this House long before some of the Gentlemen who jeer at them were politically born, and men who will remain honoured Members of this House long after those Gentlemen are politically dead. The last Motion for Adjournment has been moved by my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Aberdeen (Mr. Hunter), one of the most highly respected Members returned from Scotland; we have been supported in the Lobby by nearly every Member of the Liberal Party in this House—[Ironical laughter.] The hon. Gentleman who, though sitting upon the Liberal Benches, really belongs to the other side of the House thinks it right to jeer. I do not count him amongst the intelligent.

THE CHAIRMAN
I invite the hon. Gentleman to adhere more closely to the Question before the Committee.

§ MR. T. P. O'CONNOR
I think you will acknowledge, Mr. Courtney, it is rather hard to adhere to the Question when one is constantly interrupted by unseemly conduct on the part of hon. Gentlemen. I call upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he has any regard for the decency of his Leadership and for the dignity of the House of which, by a temporary accident, he happens to be Leader, to put an end to the unseemly wrangle on which he has rashly embarked. We have fulfilled our part of the undertaking; we mean that the Government shall fulfil theirs if we can possibly do so; and we defy any misrepresentation of our conduct outside the House.

§ MR.DILLWYN (Swansea, Town)
It seems to me that I cannot consent to go on with an important Vote of this kind at so late an hour; and therefore I move that you, Sir, do now leave the Chair.

§ MR. LEAMY (Cork Co., N.E.)
A few moments ago, when the hon. Member for the Scotland Division of Liverpool (Mr. T. P. O'Connor), stated that 322 for the last two hours we had been under the impression that the Vote before the Committee was the Education Vote, several hon. Members on the opposite Benches cried "No, no!" The Chief Secretary for Ireland and the Chancellor of the Exchequer have both given their reasons for not accepting the Motion for Progress.

THE CHAIRMAN
I think it right to say that I stated it was intended to go on with the Education Vote, and to withdraw the Vote for Criminal Prosecutions in Ireland, and that it was still technically before the Committee. I simply wish to prevent hon. Members and the Committee falling into error.

§ MR. LEAMY
I have no objection that you should think it necessary that you should come to the defence of these right hon. Gentlemen, because it is the best proof that we were right in this contest. A moment ago you brought forward this contentious Vote, one of the Votes which it was agreed should be excluded, and you expect that the noble Lord would agree to the Vote being withdrawn. Well, Sir, the noble Lord I think has confessed that we were right, and that he has been in error. It is proved conclusively—and let hon. Members take notice of it—that for two hours the noble Lord, as Leader of the House of Commons, sat in his place and did not know what was the Business before the Committee. I beg to support the Motion of the hon. Member for Swansea.

§ MR. BIGGAR (Cavan, W.)
I think it must be acknowledged on all sides of the House that to commence any contentious Business at a quarter to 1 in the morning is out of the question. It is a course which I do not think the Government ought to propose; and I must say, also, that nothing is more natural at so advanced an hour than that we should move to report Progress. I do not think the Government are right in prolonging this discussion, and of course it is impossible that at this hour the public outside can have any report of what is taking place on this question. It is all very well for the Government to ask to take non-contentious Votes at an unreasonable hour, but this is a very different thing; and I am of opinion that it would be much better to get to other Business on the Paper, and close the evening in a satisfactory manner.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Lord RANDOLPH CHURCHILL) (Paddington, S.)
The hon. Member for Cavan (Mr. Biggar) says that he does not think it reasonable that the Government should proceed to contentious Business after 1 o'clock in the morning. To a certain extent I think the hon. Member is right in that proposition; but we do not hold that the Business we are asking the Committee to proceed with is of a contentious character. The Education Estimates having been discussed at great length in the last Parliament, we were distinctly of opinion that the Committee would be ready to make progress with them. We do not hold that the proposal made to the Committee is of a contentious character; but what hon. Members seem to forget, and what it is right that they should be reminded of, is that the right hon. Gentleman who is in the position of Leader of the opposite Benches, in the absence of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Mid Lothian (Mr. W. E. Gladstone), got up and asked the Committee to say that it was a reasonable course. Therefore, we have the high authority of the right hon. Gentleman opposite for saying that the course of the Government is a reasonable one, and that the course which hon. Members below the Gangway are pursuing is unreasonable. This is a fact that should be brought strongly before the public, and that the Government have taken three divisions against this very great waste of time, for which hon. Members opposite must bear the responsibility, and particularly those Members of the Liberal Party who, although in former days they were the greatest possible advocates of more expeditious despatch of Business, are now the Leaders of Obstruction. I repeat that the Government have taken three divisions, and have been supported by a large majority of the Committee. There is no particular use in continuing this discussion under the circumstances. The public will judge of the position which the Government occupied, and of the difficulty with which they have to contend in conducting the indispensable Business of the country. I have no doubt that the proceedings of to-night will leave their mark on the public mind, and will produce the feeling that a very considerable alteration 324 should be made in the procedure of the House.

§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR (Donegal, E.)
I ask whether it is understood that in future the Government will take the Votes precisely in the order in which they stand?

§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL
The Government in future will certainly make no concession demanded by hon. Gentlemen opposite which does not suit their convenience.

§ MR. T. P. O'CONNOR (Liverpool, Scotland)
What the noble Lord had better understand is, that we have never asked for concession; we never will ask him for concession; and we are quite willing to have open war with him.

§ MR. CONYBEARE (Cornwall, Camborne)
I wish to add that it will be well for the Government to understand once for all that, as Radicals, we are determined to see that the interests of the people are properly represented in this House. [Interruption.]

§ MR. O'HEA (Donegal, W.)
I rise to Order. I beg to ask if it is in Order that these continuous interruptions should take place, which, when a Member of the House is speaking, makes his voice inaudible at the Chair?

THE CHAIRMAN
If the hon. Member attempts to speak under such circumstances it is in Order to express dissent.

§ MR. CONYBEARE
I think I am justified in saying that, as far as hon. Gentlemen are concerned, they had better go out of the House if they are exhausted. [Interruption.]

THE CHAIRMAN
As far as I can catch the observations of the hon. Gentleman they are not addressed to the Question before the Committee.

§ MR. CONYBEARE
But, Sir, I have not been allowed to make any observations. I am attempting to finish the sentence I commenced with. I was giving the noble Lord to clearly understand, in connection with the Motion for Progress, that we shall continue to protest against having sprung upon us important Votes 325 in the manner that was done at an earlier period of the evening, even if we have to remain here for weeks.