§ Bill considered in Committee.
§ (In the Committee.)
§ Sir JOHN GORST in the Chair.
§ Clause 1 (Issue of £20,984,191 out of the Consolidated Fund).
§ MR. CONYBEARE (Cornwall, Camborne)rose to address the Committee—
§ MR. CONYBEARENo, Sir.
THE CHAIRMANThen the hon. Member will not be in Order in addressing the Committee. The Question is "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
§ DR. TANNER (Cork Co., Mid)I rise for the specific purpose of getting an answer about a Question which I addressed to Her Majesty's Government the day before yesterday, as to whether it is advisable to retain the services of a man against whom charges have been made—
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! The hon. Member is not in Order. This 977 clause is a clause directing the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury to issue the sum of £20,000,000 out of the Consolidated Fund. The question the hon. Gentleman is raising is not relevant to this clause.
§ DR. TANNERA considerable portion of the salaries are paid to public servants in Ireland—I presume some of this £20,000,000 will be paid to public servants in Ireland. I understand it will cover the salaries paid to Resident Magistrates, and what is more, the salary paid to the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland.
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! The hon. Gentleman is not in Order. This is a clause directing the method by which the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury shall issue a certain sum of money out of the Consolidated Fund for the purposes of the Services of the year, and the question the hon. Member is raising is not in Order.
§ DR. TANNERI beg to move the reduction of the sum of money by the amount of £300.
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! That would not be in Order. The hon. Gentleman's opportunity for moving an Amendment has gone by. The Question is "That this Clause stand part of the Bill." That is a Question which the Committee may either affirm or reject, but it can do nothing else. No speeches will be in Order that are not addressed to that Question.
§ DR. TANNERAm I to understand that no question can be raised which will, in the main, point out that there are serious objections why this sum of public money should be granted? Am I to understand that on a question of the employment of a man who has been charged as a swindler and a thief—
THE CHAIRMANI cannot argue with the hon. Member. I have decided that the point he has raised is not in Order on this Clause. The Question is, "That this Clause stand part of the Bill." As many as are of that opinion say "Aye"—[Loud, Cries of "Aye!"]—contrary, "No."
§ DR. TANNERNo.
§ DR. TANNERThe "Noes" have it.
§ While the House was being cleared for the Division,
978§ DR. TANNER (sitting in his place with his hat on)said: I beg to say I will not take any Division. I have made my protest.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clause 2 agreed to.
§ Clause 3 (Appropriation of sums voted for supply purposes).
§ DR. CLARK (Caithness)rose to address the Committee.
§ DR. CLARKWhen I move it I will bring it up, Sir. I desire to ask the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies (Baron Henry de Worms) a very important question—
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! I cannot allow a Question to be asked unless an Amendment is moved. The hon. Gentleman will bring up his Amendment or indicate the Amendment he is going to move to this clause. I shall then be able to determine whether it is relevant to the clause or not.
THE CHAIRMANIf the hon. Gentleman objects to the clause generally, he must wait until the Question is put, "That this Clause stand part of the Bill."
§ DR. CLARKI want an answer from the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies as to whether the statement which has been wired to-day from the Cape, that it is the intention of the Government to increase the armed force, is true?
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! I cannot argue with the hon. Gentleman. If he desires to raise a point of Order I will hear him.
§ DR. CLARKIt is a point of Order. I want to know whether Schedule B does not include the Vote for Bechuanaland, and the Vote also for the salary of Secretary of State for the Colonies.
THE CHAIRMANThe hon. Gentleman might put his question in the 979 House. Clause 3 is a clause which directs the appropriation of certain sums of money which have been voted by the House itself to purposes for which the House has voted them. This is a Committee of the Whole House, and it is not open to a Committee of the Whole House to vary or negative any Resolution which is a Resolution of the House itself. I understand the hon. Gentleman wishes to vary or alter a Resolution of the House itself. That cannot be done.
THE CHAIRMANThe hon. Gentleman can discuss whether it is expedient that the Supply which has been already granted by the House should or should not be appropriated, and the mode of appropriation; but those are the only questions he can raise. Supply has been already voted. The amount has been already determined. The only question for this Committee is, whether the Treasury shall be compelled by law to appropriate the money which comes into their hands in a certain way.
§ DR. TANNERI deprecate as much as any Member of the Committee having any altercation with the hon. Gentleman who, happening to be a Member of the Government, may for the time occupy the position of Chairman. I felt extremely put out just now in having to challenge the decision arrived at by the hon. Gentleman, whom I believe this Committee is always pleased to see in the position which he at present occupies pro tem. But I do not think it is expedient that very large sums of money should be passed by this House without the House having a sufficient answer from the responsible Ministers of the Crown, who come to this House and ask for the sums with which to pay the salaried officers of the Crown—
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! The hon. Gentleman is now addressing the Committee in opposition to the decision which has been given by the Chair. The question the hon. Gentleman wishes to raise is not relevant to the clause before the Committee. The question before the Committee is whether certain sums of money shall or 980 shall not be appropriated by law to certain purposes. That is the only point, and to that point any observations of the hon. Member must be addressed.
§ DR. TANNERThat being the case of course I shall—because, as I have already shown, I do not like to enter into any controversy with a salaried officer of Her Majesty's Government—[Cries of "Order!"] I believe I am perfectly in Order in saying that. If I am wrong the Chairman can call me to Order, and not the salaried officers of the Crown who sit below the Gangway, and who ought to know better than to interrupt me. [The CHAIRMAN: Order, order!] As I understand you have ruled it out of Order, I think I had better reserve myself for an attack on the third reading of the Bill. At the same time if this sum is to be taken—
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! I am very reluctant to interrupt the hon. Gentleman, but this is not the occasion to give notice of opposition to the third reading of the Bill. The question I have put to the Committee is "That Clause 3 stand part of the Bill."
§ MR. CALDWELL (Glasgow, St. Rollox)I shall endeavour to keep in Order. I object to the principle of the application of the grants in the Schedule relating to this clause. I object——
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! We are not now discussing the Schedule, but we are discussing whether the sums voted by the House and specified in the Schdules shall or shall not be appropriated by law to the different Services. That is the only question now before the Committee.
§ MR. CALDWELLThen I am quite prepared to wait until the Schedules come on. This clause states that the money shall be appropriated according to Schedule B annexed. I shall, of course, as I am bound to do, bow to your decision, Sir; but it seems to me that if it be your ruling that upon this clause, which expressly states that the sums mentioned shall be appropriated according to Schedule B, and that it is not in Order to discuss the Appropriation in the Schedule upon this clause, we shall have no opportunity of re-raising the question on the appropriation of the money.
THE CHAIRMANI wish to be throroughly understood by the hon. 981 Member and the Committee. I cannot say now whether the hon. Member will or will not be in Order in any Motion he may make hereafter. But I think I ought to remind the hon. Member and the Committee that the different items in Schedule B consist of sums of money granted, by Resolutions of Committee of Supply, to Her Majesty for the Services of the year. Those Resolutions of Committee of Supply have been reported to the House, and the House has been pleased, by Resolution, to agree to those Resolutions, and it is not competent for this Committee to either review or alter the decisions which have been come to by the House itself.
§ DR. TANNERAm I to understand, Sir John Gorst, that this Committee of the Whole House is called together and sits merely for the purpose of passing the sums which have already come under the consideration of the House and the Committee of the House, without any discussion of material points—notably, the point I was endeavouring to raise—which is the continuance of the services of a gentleman who has been accused of being a thief and a swindler?
THE CHAIRMANI cannot undertake to lay down any general or universal rule to the Committee. All I am called upon to do is to decide the points brought before the Committee as they arise. But I should not think it fair to decide the point now brought before the Committee without warning the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Caldwell) what it was possible my decision might be, if any attempt were made to raise the discussion he wished on Schedule B. My decision is that the criticisms which the hon. Member now desires to make are not germane to the Question, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
§ MR. CALDWELLAm I in Order in objecting to the appropriation of this money?
THE CHAIRMANIf the hon. Gentleman will adduce to the Committee any reasons for not appropriating Supply in this way, and for not binding the Treasury by law to spend the money in the way provided by the Bill, he will, of course, be in Order.
§ MR. CALDWELLI apprehend I shall be perfectly in Order in speaking on the general question why the money should not be given at all. It is often usual to object to a whole grant because 982 one objects to some particular part of the grant. I presume I am entitled to speak in regard to a portion of the grant whether my reasons are sufficient or not for the refusal of the whole grant. I object to the appropriation of this money, because of the unfair manner in which these grants have been allocated. These grants have been allocated in a higher measure to England than they have been to Scotland. I may mention that according to the Probate Duty Bill—
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! The hon. Member is now travelling into the details of Schedule B, which I have already ruled is not in Order on the Question, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
§ MR. CALDWELLThen am I to understand I am not entitled to show why this clause should be rejected?
THE CHAIRMANThe hon. Gentleman is perfectly at liberty to show cause why this clause should be rejected; but the question in this case is whether, by law, the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury are or are not to be bound to apply money already voted by Parliament in the way in which Parliament orders. If the hon. Member has any reasons to urge why the Treasury should not be bound by law this year to appropriate the money in this particular way, he will be in Order in urging it.
§ MR. CALDWELLAs to your ruling, may I put this question to you, Sir—Suppose that after these sums were voted by the House new circumstances arose whereby the House thought it necessary to intervene and stop the supplies?
THE CHAIRMANIf the hon. Member has any reasons to urge why the Committee should stop the Supplies—if there are any new circumstances which would induce the Committee to reject this clause altogether, and not to allow the Government to spend the money at all, I think he would be in Order in stating them.
§ MR. CALDWELLAm I not right in this—that there is a distinction between the question of Order and the merits of my argument? Would it not be in Order for me to state my argument, and would it not be for the Committee to decide as to the validity of my argument?
THE CHAIRMANI am of opinion that if, under cover of argument on the 983 Question, "That Clause 3 stall stand part of the Bill," the hon. Member were really to address himself to questions detailed in Schedule B, that would be trifling with the Committee, and I should have to ask the hon. Member to resume his seat.
§ THE LORD MAYOR OF DUBLIN (Mr. SEXTON) (Belfast, W.)On a point of Order, Sir—may I ask you whether you, as a casual Chairman, have the power to order a Member to discontinue his speech?
§ MR. CALDWELLSir John Gorst, I must take that as a distinct refusal to allow me to discuss this clause, and as raising a very serious Constitutional question. It would not be right to allow this refusal to have a discussion on Clause 3 without a distinct ruling. I understand your ruling to be that unless I have something to show against—
§ MR. CALDWELLWell, I will allow you, Sir, to give your ruling yourself, but, in the mean time, I simply seek to show cause why this grant should not be allocated in the way pointed out in Clause 3, and I will wait until I am interrupted. I maintain that we should not grant this Appropriation in Aid in the terms of this Bill until the Committee has had an opportunity of reconsidering the whole question of the division of the grant between England, Scotland, and Ireland.
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! I am sorry to interrupt the hon. Gentleman, but I have already three or four times decided that that line of argument is not in Order.
§ DR. TANNERI rise to Order, Sir. I was attempting to raise the question of the salary of the Under Secretary of State for India—
§ MR. ISAACS (Newington, Walworth)I rise to Order—
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! The hon. Member for Mid Cork (Dr. Tanner) is speaking to a point of Order.
§ DR. TANNERI was merely putting this as an example. I think I should have been in Order in moving a reduction upon Clause 2. I find I am out of Order on Clause 3. Shall I be in Order in moving the reduction on the Schedule?
THE CHAIRMANWe must wait until we come to the Schedule. I intimated what probably my decision would be on the point, because I did not wish to take the Committee by surprise.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clause 4 agreed to.
§ Clause 5 (Sanction for Navy and Army expenditure for 1886–87 unprovided for).
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
§ DR. TANNERThis clause sanctions the Army and Navy expenditure for the year. Am I to understand that this is intended to be anything in the nature of a Supplementary Grant or not?
THE CHAIRMANIt is not part of my business to enter into such explanations. Clause 5 is one which has appeared in every Appropriation Bill for years past. It is a usual clause, and it is to provide for the expenditure in a particular way of the money voted for the Army and Navy. If the hon. Gentleman objects to the way in which the money is to be appropriated he will be in Order in stating his objection.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clause 6 agreed to.
§ Clause 7 agreed to.
§ Schedule A (Grants out of the Consolidated Fund).
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Schedule A stand part of the Bill."
§ DR. TANNEROn this Schedule I wish to call attention to a certain sum which is appropriated out of the sum voted by the House.
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! The hon. Member is in error about Schedule A. It is a Schedule of Acts under which, during the present Session, sums of money have already been granted for the Services of the year.
§ Schedule agreed to.
§ Schedule B (Appropriation of grants).
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Schedule B stand part of the Bill."
§ DR. TANNERrose to address the Committee.
§ DR. TANNERYes.
§ DR. TANNERI beg to move that a sum of money, which is to be appropriated out of this Schedule, be reduced by the sum of £300.
§ DR. TANNERCivil Service, Class III. I do so—
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! If the hon. Gentleman will bring up his Amendment I shall see exactly what it is.
§ DR. TANNERwalked to the Table and proceeded to put his Amendment in writing.
§ MR. CONYBEAREWhile the hon. Gentleman is writing out his Amendment may I—
§ MR. CONYBEAREI thought it would save time.
§ DR. TANNERhaving handed in his Amendment.
THE CHAIRMANsaid: The hon. Member proposes to move that the Civil Service Estimates, Class III., Schedule B, Part VII., the sum total of which is £6,398,872, be reduced by the sum of £300. I am of opinion that such an Amendment cannot be put, and for the following reasons:—The sums which are specified in Class III., Schedule B, Part VII. are various sums which have been appropriated by Resolution of the Committee of Supply for the Services of the year. Those Resolutions of the Committee of Supply have been duly reported to the House itself, and the House itself has on each occasion passed Resolutions expressing its agreement with the Committee of Supply in the said Resolutions. The various sums so appropriated are, therefore, appropriated by the Resolution of the House itself, and I am of opinion that this Committee of the House now sitting is not competent to entertain any Amendment which would be inconsistent with the Resolutions which have been arrived at by the House itself. This Amendment, therefore, cannot be put.
§ MR. SEXTONI wish to ask you, Sir, whether in your opinion it would be open to raise this question for determination on the Report of these proceedings to the House itself.
THE CHAIRMANThe hon. Member will see that the Report stage will 986 be taken with the Speaker in the Chair. It would be most improper for me to express an opinion as to what would be in Order under such circumstances.
§ MR. CALDWELLWhat is the object of Schedule B being put, when there is no power to move Amendments?
THE CHAIRMANThat is not a question which I think I ought to be asked. It is not part of my business to explain the reasons for the various forms of the House.
THE CHAIRMANThe hon. Member asks me a general question. I must decline to answer a general question. If the hon. Member will show me what part he proposes to omit I will consider the Amendment.
THE CHAIRMANThe hon. Member proposes to leave out No. 15 of Part 6. No. 15 of Part 6 appears to be for Salaries and Expenses of the Local Government Board, including various Grants in Aid of local taxation. The total is £4,448,968, and that is the sum resolved upon by the House itself, and, according to the principle which I endeavoured to explain to the Committee just now, it is incompetent for this Committee of the Whole House to alter the decision of the House itself.
§ MR. WADDY (Lincolnshire, Brigg)May I suggest, Sir, upon the point of Order, that this very narrow limitation of the subjects we are entitled to discuss is, perhaps, not quite in accordance with the principle laid down when this very matter was discussed in the House under the Speakership of Mr. Brand, on the 12th of August, 1876. The principle then laid down was, as you, Sir, will, no doubt, remember, that although we are not in a position to deal with the Appropriation Bill in the same way as we deal will Votes in Committee of Supply—there must be some relevancy, of course—yet matters may be introduced touching the principles upon which the sums have been granted, and even the length of time for which the sums may be granted. The question then suggested to the Speaker was, whether we were not at liberty to limit Supplies to three months, instead of allowing it to go over the whole year. Mr. Speaker 987 Brand was not prepared to say that it would be in Order to move an Amendment limiting the Supplies to three months; but he thought the hon. Member for Poole was in Order in asking whether it was proper that the Naval Forces of the country should be sent to Turkish waters in favour of a certain policy, and in calling in question the conduct of the Diplomatic Agents of the Crown for whom Supplies had been appropriated. It appears, therefore, that it is competent for us to discuss the conduct of the servants of the Crown for whom the Supplies have been appropriated, and that we can do so upon the question of appropriating these Supplies. Surely it is competent for us to decline to appropriate a particular sum of money to a particular person on account of the conduct of that person. Perhaps I had better read Mr. Speaker Brand's own words—
It is not for me to answer any hypothetical questions which may be put; but with reference to what has fallen from the hon. and learned Member for Limerick (Mr. Butt), I am by no means prepared to say that an Amendment on the Appropriation Bill limiting the Supplies to three months would be out of Order. As to the question whether the hon. Member for Poole was in Order, I may say that although he made no Motion, yet he gave Notice of calling attention to certain matters, and it appeared to me that he was in Order, because he raised the question of Supplies in a most direct manner. For instance, he asked whether it was proper that the naval forces of the country should be sent to Turkish waters in favour of a certain policy, and he also called in question the conduct of the Diplomatic Agents of the Crown, for whom Supplies had been appropriated. I think it right to observe that I interrupted the hon. Member for Dundee when he proposed to speak generally of the Constitution of the country, and it certainly appeared to me that such a discussion was scarcely relevant to the Appropriation Bill."—(3 Hansard [231], 1161.)
§ MR. WADDYThe Speaker was in the Chair, and was laying down what might be discussed upon the Appropriation Bill.
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! The hon. Member's observations refer to the different stages of the Appropriation Bill in the House itself. It would be most presumptuous in me to state 988 what is or is not in Order in the House. Perhaps I may be allowed to say that no doubt, on the various stages of the Appropriation Bill in the House, considerable latitude always has been given as to the topics which may be discussed. I may remind the Committee that, up to the present year, there was always a stage at which a Motion was made that Mr. Speaker do leave the Chair, in order that the House might go into Committee. That was a stage of the Bill in the House itself. The function we are engaged in now is of a much more humble character. We are examining the details of this Bill in Committee, and the Question put to me is whether in Committee of the Whole House a Motion to amend Schedule B can be entertained. That is the question which was put to me, and I have given my decision—namely, that in my humble opinion such a Motion is not in Order upon the ground that such a Motion would be inconsistent with the decision which the House itself has arrived at, and to which the Committee of the Whole House is bound to conform.
§ MR. CALDWELLIf it is held that we cannot now re-open any of the items, because the Votes have already been passed by the Committee of Supply, and been approved by the House—if the decision of the House already arrived at is final and not subject to repeal—upon what principle is it that we can raise these questions in the House itself when the third reading comes on?
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! The hon. Gentleman is asking me conundrums which I have several times stated to the Committee I do not consider myself competent to express an opinion upon. But I may, perhaps, remind the hon. Member that, though the House itself may be entitled to review and re consider its own decisions, it does not follow that a Committee of the Whole House can undertake that function.
§ MR. SEXTONWith reference to the declaration of the late Speaker, quoted by the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for the Brigg Division of Lincolnshire (Mr. Waddy), to the effect that the conduct of the agents of the Crown can be criticized upon the Appropriation Bill, I would ask you whether it is possible, on any other stage of the Bill than that of Com- 989 mittee, to touch the salaries of certain public servants—to move to reduce items?
THE CHAIRMANThat, again, is a question I cannot answer. I cannot say what will be done in the House itself, and I cannot say what the procedure of the House will be. In my opinion the items in Schedule B cannot be amended in Committee of the Whole House upon the Appropriation Bill.
§ DR. CLARKIs it in the province of the Committee to consider the policy embodied in the Votes before passing them?
THE CHAIRMANI should say not. The Committee has to consider the details of the Bill—to see that the details of the Bill are satisfactory and correct.
§ DR. TANNERI rise for the purpose of suggesting that Schedule B—
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! The hon. Member must either move an Amendment to Schedule B or wait until I put the Question, "That Schedule B stand part of the Bill."
§ MR. CALDWELLI have put down as an Amendment that part ("a") of Schedule B be omitted.
THE CHAIRMANI rule, for the same reasons I have already given, that such an Amendment is inadmissible.
§ Question proposed, "That Schedule B stand part of the Bill."
§ DR. TANNERSir, as I disapprove strongly of the policy of murder and assassination, backed up by lying, and as I disapprove of the employment—although such persons may be congenial to certain people—of swindlers and thieves—I wish to put the matter as mildly as I possibly can, in order that the Chief Secretary may understand—I beg to move that Class III. be not appropriated.
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! It is too late for the hon. Member to do that. I paused for along time before I put the question, "That Schedule B stand part of the Bill," in order to allow anyone to propose an Amendment. It is now too late to move an Amendment.
§ DR. TANNERI move that the money be not allocated.
THE CHAIRMANIt has already been decided that from the date of the passing of the Act certain money shall be appropriated to certain purposes. The only question now is whether 990 Schedule B shall be a Schedule of the Bill.
§ MR. CALDWELLI thought we had precluded ourselves by approving of Clause 3, which provides that Schedule B in its entirety shall be appropriated.
§ DR. TANNERI beg to move a reduction of Schedule B. I for one am of opinion that in the state of affairs in which we are at present landed by Her Majesty's Government, through the horrid and iniquitous manner of proceeding which is their leading and chief characteristic in dealing with any unfortunate people with whom they may happen to come in contact, whether, it be Sir John Gorst—[Cries of "Order!"]
THE CHAIRMANIt is proper to speak of Members by the constituencies they represent, and not by their individual names.
§ DR. TANNERI was speaking of the Chair. I am always in the habit when Mr. Courtney is in the Chair of addressing him as Mr. Courtney, and I did not know I was out of Order in addressing the present Chairman by the name which he dignifies. I say that when we in this House are doing what we are supposed by our constituents to do, taking into consideration the action of the Government or Governments, and seeing what we see at a time like the present, with all the populations, whether they be those "black people" of whom we have heard—
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! The hon. Member's observations are not germane to the Question, "That Schedule B stand part of the Bill."
§ DR. TANNERI was coming to that, if you give me time. If I am not to be permitted to speak, if the Chairman tells me not to speak I will resume my seat.
THE CHAIRMANI cannot allow the hon. Member to address the Chair in that way. He is perfectly in Order in addressing to the Committee any remarks relevant to the Question, "That Schedule B stand part of the Bill." If the hon. Member makes remarks of another character, it is my duty to call him to Order.
§ DR. TANNERWe all understand that; but I rose for the purpose of calling attention to a fact. I thought Her Majesty's Government would have given me some facility in this matter, 991 but I regret to say that they have not done so. I made a very specific charge, and I have done my best in every possible way, consulting, in the first place, the Chair—everybody in this House cannot at all times be thought rashly of because they may make a casual mistake. I say when we are here in Committee of Supply to appropriate sums of money for a swindler and a thief, a servant of the Chief Secretary for Ireland, the right hon. Gentleman ought to be in his place, and ought not to be such a coward as he is.
§ DR. TANNERI called the Chief Secretary a coward, and he is a coward.
§ MR. AIRD (Paddington, N.)Mr. Chairman, I beg to move—
THE CHAIRMANOrder, order! I must request the hon. Member for Mid Cork to withdraw the word "coward."
§ DR. TANNERI call him a coward and a liar, and he is both: I call him a coward and a liar.
THE CHAIRMANAs the hon. Member refuses to withdraw the language which I characterize as un-Parliamentary—as he has not only refused to withdraw it, but repeated it with aggravation in the hearing of the Committee—I have no course but to name Dr. Tanner—[Dr. TANNER: With the greatest possible pleasure]—for disregarding the authority of the Chair.
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. GOSCHEN) (St. George's, Hanover Square)Then, Sir, I have to move that Dr. Tanner be suspended from the service of the House.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Dr. Tanner be suspended from the service of the House."—(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)
§ MR. CONYBEAREOn the question of Order, Sir—
§ MR. CONYBEAREOn the question of Order, Sir—
§ MR. SEXTONOn the question of Order, Sir, I should like to ask whether the power to name a Member to the House is not confined to Mr. Speaker when in the Chair, and to the Chairman of Ways and Means when 992 presiding over a Committee of the Whole House? I beg to submit that as you are not the Chairman of Ways and Means, you have no power to name anyone.
THE CHAIRMANThe hon. Member is in error. The power is not confined to the Speaker or Chairman of Ways and Means. It is a power which is given to any Member who occupies the Chair; and I may remind the Committee that I am not a mere casual Chairman, but one of those who was designated under the Standing Order by Mr. Speaker.
§ Question put, and agreed to.
§ Whereupon the Chairman left the Chair in order to report the said Resolution to the House.
§ MR. SPEAKERhaving resumed the Chair—
SIR JOHN GORSTreported that Dr. Tanner had been named by him to the Committee as disregarding the authority of the Chair, and that the Committee had resolved that Dr. Tanner be suspended from the service of the House.
§ Whereupon Mr. Speaker put the Question to the House, "That Dr. Tanner be suspended from the service of the House."—(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)
§ MR. CHAPLIN (Lincolnshire, Sleaford)On a question of Order, Mr. Speaker—
§ MR. SPEAKERThere can be no debate.
§ Question put, and agreed to.
§ MR. SPEAKERthen directed Dr. Tanner to withdraw.
§ MR. SEXTONHe has withdrawn, Sir.
§ MR. CHAPLINOn a point of Order, Sir, cannot an Amendment be moved?
§ MR. SPEAKEROrder, order!