§ IR WILFRID LAWSON (Cumberland, Cockermouth)I desire to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether his attention has been called to a statement in The Times of to-day, to the effect that Lord Salisbury, Lord Magheramorne, Lord Londesborough, Earl Fitzwilliam, the Earl of Yarborough, and the Earl of Fife sent carriages to assist in bringing voters to the poll at the Hornsey election; and whether he or any Member of the Government is prepared to make an investigation into the matter with a view to safeguarding the Privileges of this House? In the absence of the First Lord, perhaps the Secretary to the Colonies will kindly answer the Question.
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Sir HENRY HOLLAND) (Hampstead)I certainly am not in a position to say whether the attention of the First Lord of the Treasury has been drawn to the paragraph in The Times, nor, in the absence of my Colleagues, can I undertake that any investigation will be made into the matter.
§ SIR WILFRID LAWSONShall I be in Order, Sir, in calling attention to this matter, either to-day or to-morrow, as a Breach of Privilige?
§ MR. SPEAKERI must remind the hon. Baronet that the House has already decided the point in another case; and I do not think it can be raised again as 1490 a question of Privilege. The hon. Baronet can, of course, put a question upon the subject if he chooses.
§ SIR WILFRID LAWSONMay I point out that this is a perfectly distinct case, and has nothing to do with the case which was before the House the other day?
§ MR. SPEAKERNo doubt, it is a different case; but it involves precisely the same principle.
§ MR. BRADLAUGH (Northampton)Upon the point of Order, may I be allowed respectfully to submit that the point decided the other day was as to a particular case, and not as to the general principle of the employment of Peers' carriages at elections. There was a special allegation in that case.
§ SIR WILFRID LAWSONI presume I shall be in Order in giving Notice of a Motion?
§ MR. SPEAKERI do not exactly understand what the point is which has been raised by the hon. Member for Northampton.
§ MR. BRADLAUGHMy point is this—whether the decision the other day was not in regard to the particular matter then alleged, and not upon the general principle?
§ MR. SPEAKERI can only interpret the decision which was given the other day in one way. It was then alleged that the carriages of certain Peers had been used at a certain election, and the question raised was whether that constituted a Breach of Privilege, upon which question the House resolved to pass to the Orders of the Day. This case appears to raise exactly the same question.
§ [Mr. W. H. SMITH here entered the House.]
§ SIR WILFRID LAWSONAs I see that the First Lord of the Treasury is now in his place, I wish to inform him that I have given Notice of a Question which he may, perhaps, be prepared to answer. My Question is—Whether he or any Member of the Government is prepared to make an investigation into the statement of The Times of to-day that Lord Salisbury and certain other Peers sent carriages to assist in bringing voters to the poll at the Hornsey Election? I have already given Notice of the Question to the right hon. Gentleman.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. W. H. SMITH) (Strand, Westminster)I received the Notice of the hon. Baronet about a minute ago. I know nothing of the statement to which he refers. I have no information that I can give him.
§ SIR WILFRID LAWSONWill the right hon. Gentleman undertake to make an inquiry?
§ MR. W. H. SMITHNo, Sir; I cannot undertake to make an inquiry. I think it would be improper that the time of the House should be occupied in such a trivial investigation.