§ MR. BRADLAUGH (Northampton)As the hon. Baronet the Member for the City of London (Sir Robert Fowler) is reported to have stated on behalf of the Corporation last night at a banquet that— 1666
It was by no wish of theirs, but contrary to their wishes, that the investigation was deferred from Monday to next Thursday,I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether I postponed the Motion solely in consequence of a letter from himself stating that—In a matter of such grave importance to the parties charged, Mr. Smith thinks they should have somewhat more time to consider the course proposed and the representations they may wish to make upon it?
§ THE FIRST LORD (Mr. W. H. SMITH) (Strand, Westminster)I did make that representation to the hon. Member opposite in the form he has stated to the House; but I did so without any communication from either of the parties. I felt that it was my duty, looking at the position I occupy in this House, to do so in fairness to the persons affected.