§ MR. HUNTER (Aberdeen, N.)said, he regretted the absence of the First Lord of the Treasury, but hoped some responsible Member of the Government would answer the Question he had to put. He had heard that there was an intention to propose a Saturday Sitting, and to devote that Sitting to Scotch Business. If that were so, he took the opportunity at the earliest moment to enter his most emphatic protest against any proceeding of the kind. Scotch Members had been detained in the House month after month attending to Business wholly connected with England, but not until the fag end of the Session was a day devoted to Scotch claims. After continuing an exhausting process of late hours, it was now actually proposed to take away the only day of leisure. That was only part of his complaint against the gross mismanagement of Scotch Business. Every subject of interest to Scotland had been ignored by the Government. When Business affecting the farmers of Scotland, who were suffering great distress, was brought before the House, and a measure was proposed to prevent a wider distress, it was blocked from the other side of the House. Every attempt made to improve the condition of the crofters was systematically blocked, while the Government miss-spent a few hundred pounds in sending 98 families from the country. The large fishing interest was suffering severely from the practice of trawling. An hon. Member on the other side introduced a Bill for the 1102 limitation of trawling, and he (Mr. Hunter) also introduced a Bill with a like object; but the objection of the right hon. and learned Lord Advocate blocked his Bill, and another Member blocked the other Bill, and so another year would pass without an attempt to remedy one of the most trying grievances of Scotch fishermen. There was a measure in which Scotch Members took a great interest which in a former Parliament passed the House by a large majority and was thrown out in "another place," a Bill to provide for the expenses of returning officers at elections. Scotch Members were fortunate in the ballot, and secured a Wednesday; but the Government appropriated the day, and, instead of giving other facilities for the measure being discussed, allowed the Bill to be blocked for the remainder of the Session. The Government had produced no measure of general importance, with the exception of a bulky measure inherited from their Predecessors. It was a perfect scandal that the affairs of Scotland should be treated in that way. If there happened to be a Scotchman who doubted the necessity of having a Home Rule Parliament for Scotland, he should have been present on the previous night to see the way in which Scotch Business was treated, and the way in which speeches from Scotch Members were dealt with. The matter, he admitted, was of no interest at all to English Members, who were impatient at being detained in the early hours of the morning. Under the circumstances, he entered his most emphatic protest against a system utterly destructive of convenience of Members, of giving a Saturday Sitting at the tail end of the Session for the transaction of Scotch Business, and demanded from the Government a fair share of the time of the House.
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. GOSCHEN) (St. George's, Hanover Square)said, he would report to his right hon. Friend the First Lord of the Treasury the observations of the hon. Member. He understood that there was an opinion among Scotch Members that Saturday would be a convenient day for the discussion of Scotch Business. He regretted that it had not been found possible to make more progress with Scotch Business, and assured hon. Members that there was no desire 1103 on the part of the Government in any way to depreciate the importance of Scotch legislation.
§ MR. ESSLEMONT (Aberdeen, E.)said, there appeared to be some misunderstanding in the minds of the Government. He did himself, at an earlier period of the Session, refer to the opportunity that a Saturday Sitting might be given for Scotch Business, but that suggestion was only in relation to Scotch Bills in charge of private Members; he certainly did not expect that Scotch measures the Government desired to press would be relegated to a Saturday Sitting at the end of the Session. He believed that, in the suggestion alluded to, they would be consulting the interests of their constituents and the convenience of the Government; but, certainly, there would be good reason to complain if a Saturday Sitting were occupied with Scotch Government Business. For his own part, he would be willing to sacrifice any day in the interest of Scotch legislation; but that did not imply that Scotch Members would in any way be satisfied with the way in which Scotch Business had been treated. It was within the knowledge of the Government that Scotch Members cheerfully, or with the best grace they could, gave up a Wednesday they had secured at the early period of the Session, to enable the Government to pass the Rules of Procedure then before the House; but, having done that, they did expect some consideration from the Government in return. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer would make such representations to his Colleagues as would secure something at least in the nature of an indemnification for the sacrifices they had made.
§ MR. WALLACE (Edinburgh, E.), as one of those who supported the suggestion of a Saturday Sitting to make progress with Scotch Business, explained that he certainly did not do so as in any way regarding it as a desirable way of treating Scotch Business; it was simply a fit of desperation, in the hope that if the Government would not give them something like fair treatment, they might secure some treatment at least. They were glad to be treated at all; it it was better to be maltreated than ignored. That was practically the position of Scotch Members in the choice of the alternatives before them. The whole 1104 matter was regarded as insignificant and contemptible by English Members and by the Government; or, if that was not their state of feeling, the Government contrived to produce that impression. The suggestion when made was received as usual with a howl of derision and contempt from the followers of the Government, who voted Scotch opinion down. Even last night, there was a painful recollection of the treatment Scotch matters received in his own humble person. He could not help remembering this, though his Motion was defeated by the right hon. and learned Lord Advocate with his myrmidons, Scotch opinion was two to one in its favour. There was one consolatory reflection that moved him when he threw out a suggestion for a Saturday Sitting, that probably on that day a considerable part of the Supporters of Her Majesty's Government would be away, amusing themselves, and there might be a possibility for once of the voice of Scotland having some small influence in the determination of Scotch matters. But he found it was vain to rely even upon that hope. He did not uphold Her Majesty's Goverment in the system of putting forward Saturday Sittings as the proper way of dealing with Scotch Business. It was an insulting way of dealing with Scotch Business; but he said again he would rather have Scotch Business treated thus than not at all; rather so, than that insult and injury should be combined by Scotch matters being neglected and altogether ignored.
§ THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. H. A. MACDONALD) (Edinburgh and St. Andrew's Universities)said, the hon. Member who raised this discussion had forgotten one important Scotch measure of great bulk that had occupied much attention. [Mr. HUNTER said, he had mentioned it.] That measure of considerable bulk and volume had occupied the close attention of Scotch Members over its many details in Committee for 16 or 17 days. Good and permanent work had been thus accomplished, and the object of a Saturday Sitting was to meet the earnest desire of Scotch Members and bring this Bill to maturity. He reminded hon. Members that he had been urged to find a day for the purpose not later than the present week, and it had been impossible to obtain any day but Saturday. [An hon. MEMBER: 1105 Why?] If the exigencies of Parliamentary Business did not require an Autumn Session, there would have been other time in the next six weeks available. But the time before the holidays was short, though there would be the months of November and December to carry Business to conclusion, and he hoped for the furtherance of that end they would be enabled to give a good account of work done on Saturday.
§ MR. CALDWELL (Glasgow, St. Rollox)said, the Bill to which reference had been made contained 500 or 600 clauses, and though much of it consisted of Consolidation Clauses, it was undoubtedly a measure of great magnitude and importance. It was not yet before the House, though it had been approved in Committee. It had not been before the Local Authorities with its material Committee alterations; but it ought to go before the people of Scotland to be considered during the Recess. It was simply ridiculous to attempt to dispose of such a Bill at a Saturday Sitting; it could only be done by passing the Bill en bloc, without any discussion at all. Last Session the Government gave a Saturday Sitting for Scotch Business, and it was understood that the time would be given to measures Scotch Members were in favour of; but, in fact, these measures were preceded by other measures to which Scotch Members were opposed, with the intimation that they must be passed before the others could be taken, a species of coercion against which he protested most strongly. Far better would it be to let this bulky Bill stand over for the autumn, than make an attempt to pass it en bloc, which would probably lead to its being talked out and other measures being blocked.
§ MR. EDWARD HARRINGTON (Kerry, W.)said, he claimed to have some interest in a Saturday Sitting, for, of course, it was the duty of all Members to be present, though he could not pretend to thoroughly understand the provisions of the Burgh Police Bill. Looking at its bulk of 17 ounces of paper, how it could be disposed of at one Sitting he did not understand. It was not often he found himself in accord with a Liberal Unionist, but he recognized the healthy tone of the hon. Member's (Mr. Caldwell's) protest against coercion. Certainly, it would be useless to have a Saturday Sitting for Business 1106 that could not eventually pass; it would be better to leave such over to the latter period of the Session.
§ DR. TANNER (Cork Co., Mid)assured the Government that if they took for Scotch Business a little of the time they were devoting to the consideration of Parnellism and Crime, Irish Members would take no exception to that course; but, on the contrary, would hail with satisfaction the appropriation of time to the solemn and substantial Scotch Bill which the hon. Member had referred to. Certainly, he, for one, took exception to these Saturday performances. Saturday performances were always badly attended. What usually happened was, that a certain section of Members were told off to attend and outvote Scotch Members, while a certain number of others formed a more or less attentive audience on the occasion. Bearing in mind the hours the House had been sitting during the week—though they were not so long as in former years—the Government would do well to forego their intention to hold a Sitting on Saturday, and utilize some of the time they were allowing to run waste.
§ MR. FIRTH (Dundee)asked, was it proposed to set down other Bills on Saturday in addition to the one mentioned?
§ MR. J. H. A. MACDONALDsaid, it was proposed to set down the Bail Bill, a short measure that had passed Committee.