§ DR. CLARK (Caithness)asked whether the statement of the right hon. Gentleman applied to the Scotch University Bill?
§ MR. W. H. SMITHI did not mean to convey that. I said we could not hope to pass a measure which was hotly contested. I understand that in the case of the Scotch University Bill there is a very strong desire on the part of Members that that Bill should be brought on this Session, and the Government will give an opportunity for discussing it.
§ MR. MUNDELLA (Sheffield, Brightside)asked whether the House was to understand that the Van and Wheel Tax Bill was definitely abandoned—dead, and would not be revived again?
§ MR. W. H. SMITHI have distinctly said the Government could not proceed with it.
§ MR. HUNTER (Aberdeen, N.)asked whether it was proposed to press the Scotch University Bill with all the power of the Government against the Scotch Members?
§ MR. W. H. SMITHI think hon. Members are unreasonable in the interpretation they put upon my statements. I have said I understood the Scotch Members desired to have this Bill discussed, and I will give them an opportunity of doing so.
§ MR. CONYBEARE (Cornwall, Camborne)Having regard to the very definite and oft-repeated pledges given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that he would not abandon this Bill, may I ask whether the First Lord of the Treasury contemplates that the Chancellor of the Exchequer will resign his position? [Cries of "Order!"]
§ MR. ILLINGWORTH (Bradford, W)As we understand that it is the difficulties of the moment, inside and outside the House, which, have prevented the Chancellor of the Exchequer from proceeding with this Bill, may I ask whether it will be one of the earliest measures the Government will propose to deal with next Session?
§ MR. W. H. SMITHIt is somewhat too early to make any statement of that sort. We have already entered into sufficient engagements for next Session.
§ MR. C. W. GRAY (Essex, Maldon)asked whether the Government would take into consideration the advisability of making some compensation to the agricultural interest for the loss of the Van and Wheel Tax?
§ MR. W. H. SMITHI do not regard that as a contribution to the agricultural interest. The proposal was one for the relief of rates which went as much towards the towns as the country, and it will be for the House to consider whether some measure of the kind in relief of the ratepayers ought not to be carried into effect.
§ MR. BRADLAUGH (Northampton)asked when the Employers' Liability Bill would be taken?
§ MR. W. H. SMITHThe Government is under the necessity of proceeding with Supply. The necessities of the Exchequer require that we should have the Votes for Classes V. and VI. and the remainder of Class IV. before any other Business is taken. If the Committee of Supply will give us those Votes in the course of Thursday and Friday, we should proceed with the Employers' Liability Bill on Saturday. I understand that is an arrangement which will be convenient to hon. Members interested in that Bill. If that is so, and if we obtain those Votes on Friday evening, I should be disposed to take that course; if not, it must stand over till after the Irish Estimates.
§ MR. BROADHURST (Nottingham, W.)said, that since the communication was made to the right hon. Gentleman, he had learnt that some of his hon. Friends had made other engagements for Saturday which they could not forego, and had the strongest objections to the Bill being brought on in their absence.
§ MR. W. H. SMITHI can only say that the suggestion came from the hon. 488 Member himself, or I should not have made it. Under those circumstances we shall proceed with Supply on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, and after the Irish Estimates we will take the Employers' Liability Bill.
§ MR. MUNDELLAasked, if Supply would be taken in the order in which it stood?
§ MR. W. H. SMITHNo, Sir. I have already said that we require the money on Class VI.
§ In answer to a further Question from Mr. BROADHURST,
§ MR. W. H. SMITHsaid, the Employers' Liability Bill would be mentioned again to-morrow.