HC Deb 11 May 1888 vol 326 cc49-52
MR. JOHN MORLEY (Newcastle-upon-Tyne)

In answer to a Question of mine on Tuesday last, the right hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Treasury hinted that it might be necessary to take a Morning Sitting on Friday next. In consequence of the rapid transaction of Public Business since that Question was answered, I suppose we may take it for granted that that idea is dropped?

THE FIRST LORD (Mr. W. H. SMITH) (Strand, Westminster)

I should be exceedingly glad that there should be no Sitting on Friday morning next; but the right hon. Gentleman must be aware that there is usually some time consumed on the Motion for Adjournment: and as Thursday is fully appropriated for other Business, unless the House is willing to adjourn without discussion on Thursday evening, it will be necessary to have a Morning Sitting. The Business on Monday, as I have stated, will be some Irish and other Bills. I am afraid it will be necessary to have a Morning Sitting on Tuesday, unless we can reach a Motion which it will be my duty to make with reference to the Imperial defences, and on which some discussion is likely to arise. I should regret exceedingly to deprive hon. and gallant Gentlemen on either side of the House of the opportunity of which, I understand, they wish to avail themselves of debating the proposal on which the Bill will be founded to provide for the Imperial defences. Unless that is reached by 10 o'clock on Monday evening it will involve a Morning Sitting on Tuesday. On Thursday it is intended to take the Employers' Liability Bill.

In reply to Mr. H. GARDNER (Essex, Saffron Walden),


said, the Committee on the Local Government Bill would not be taken before the Monday after the re-assembling of the House.


said, the Motion of his hon. Friend the Member for West Nottingham (Mr. Broadhurst) was on the Paper for Tuesday, which attracted deep interest among Members on that side of the House; and he asked whether the right hon. Gentleman would not defer his Resolution on Imperial defences until Thursday?


said, he understood there was a very strong desire that the Employers' Liability Bill should be read a second time before the Whitsuntide holidays; and if the Motion he proposed to make was put down for Thursday, he was afraid there was little chance of an adequate discussion on the Employers' Liability Bill.

MR. BROADHURST (Nottingham, W.)

said, he thought he might appeal as to the Morning Sitting on Tuesday, as those near him had done their best, especially since Easter, to facilitate the despatch of Public Business. [Mr. W. H. SMITH: Hear, hear!] He feared there would not be facilities sufficient to deal with the Bill on the eve of the Recess, as a number of his Friends had made arrangements to leave London before Thursday.


said, he thought that the desire to place the Bill in a secure position was greater than the contemplation of a holiday. Under the circumstances, he hoped the hon. Gentleman would be satisfied with the arrangements which had been made. He should do his best to shorten the discussion prior to his Motion on Tuesday, and keep a House, so that adequate attention might be given to the subject. He wished to endorse the remarks of the hon. Member as to the conduct of the Opposition in facilitating Public Business.

MR. T. M. HEALY (Longford, N.)

With regard to the question of the Morning Sitting on Tuesday, in the event of the Business not concluding at 10 o'clock, may I remind the right hon. Gentleman that he has put Irish Business on the Paper for Monday which it will be wholly impossible to conclude by that hour? Might I, therefore, suggest to him that he should postpone the first Order—the Parliamentary Under Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland Bill—and then we might get on with the other Bill—the Land Law (Ireland) (Land Commission) Bill—and perhaps conclude the debate by 10 o'clock.


I am exceedingly anxious to meet the convenience of hon. Members on both sides of the House; but I think it is better for the Government to adhere to the announcement that they have made.


observed that, as it appeared by the answer of the right hon. Gentleman that the Morning Sitting on Tuesday was required, not for the advancement of the Employers' Liability Bill, or for the discussion of the Motion with regard to the National defences, but for the Parliamentary Under Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland Bill, he would give Notice that when the measure was brought forward he would move the postponement of the debate.


Might I remind the right hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Treasury that there is also Irish Private Business fixed for Monday? The Ulster Canal and Tyrone Navigation Bill is fixed for that day, and it will necessarily involve considerable discussion. Might I suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that he would arrange with the hon. Baronet the Member for Mid Armagh (Sir James Corry) to take that measure on some date after Whitsuntide, at a time when it would be more convenient to give the measure adequate time for discussion?


I am exceedingly obliged to the hon. and learned Gentleman for his suggestion, and I will see what arrangement can be made.