ADJOURNMENT. (Hansard, 6 March 1889)

§ MR. A. ELLIOT (Roxburgh)
I should like to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether it will not be possible to find some occasion more suitable than the Debate on the Address, to discuss the question to which the Amendment of the hon. Member (Dr. Clark) has relation.

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
I hope sincerely that another and a much more suitable opportunity will be found for discussing the question to which the hon. Gentleman has referred. I think 1103 that what has occurred in connection with the Address on the present occasion is an evidence, which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Mid Lothian himself referred to in strong language, of the extreme inconvenience of attempting to deal with questions of great importance simply on Amendments to the Address. It is obvious that a sufficient and proper opportunity is not afforded by an attempt to graft on the Address Amendments dealing with these Questions—opportunities which they could have by discussing Amendments on substantive Motions or on Bills, and which they are now entirely deprived of. I trust opportunity will be found, so far as the Government is concerned, and there will be no hesitation whatever in giving full consideration to the very important question involved in the Amendment of the hon. Member.

§ MR. BRADLAUGH
I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman, now that the Debate on the Address is completed, can name a day for the discussion of the question of Perpetual Pensions for which I have been promised a day?

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
I am under an obligation to the hon. Gentleman to name a day for that purpose, but he is aware that we are under statutory compulsion to proceed with Supply so as to obtain the supplies necessary for the purposes of the coming year, and voting the Supplementary Estimates before a given day in March, the 10th or 19th. We must ask the House to consider the financial provisions for the services of the country, and so soon as that is accomplished, I will endeavour to meet my obligation to the hon. Gentleman.

§ MR. R. T. REID (Dumfries)
Are we to understand that the right hon. Gentleman will give facilities for the discussion of these matters, which have been excluded by the Closure, or are his remarks merely the expression of a benevolent wish?

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
It must be obvious that I cannot undertake to give facilities to hon. Gentlemen. If I were to begin at the commencement of the Session to undertake to give facilities for the discussion of questions of the greatest importance, I should find myself in the position either of inability to carry on the work and duties of 1104 the Government, or meeting the obligations which I had undertaken The hon. and learned Member is aware that there are certain days at the disposal of private Members of this House, and there are certain Bills on the Paper which will give an opportunity for the discussion of Questions of this character, and certain Votes of the Estimates which will also afford an opportunity of which I have no doubt hon. Members will avail themselves.

§ DR. CLARK
It is a fact that there are 670 Members of this House, of whom 70 are Scotch Members, and what chance have 70 against 600, in a ballot, of raising the question of Home Rule for Scotland?

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
The hon. Member is an exceedingly intelligent, ingenious, and active Member of Parliament, and if he will refer to the number of times he spoke last autumn Session, he will find that had the other 69 Scotch Members occupied the same amount of time, we must have been exclusively occupied with Scotch questions during the whole of the Autumn Session. I cannot, therefore, think that the hon. Member has any great grievance; but I can assure him that the interests of Scotland will have the fullest consideration so far as the Government are concerned.

§ Mr. CONYBEARE
Mr. Speaker, comments have been made of the most invidious character by the President of the Local Government Board as to the length of time which, in the exercise of our duty, my hon. Friend (Mr. Graham) and I occupied in this House. The right hon. Gentleman had the assurance and audacity to bring a charge of obstruction against us, and it is only fair that I should say one or two words of defence against these charges. The right hon. Gentleman insinuated, at any rate, that we had been given to understand that the debate on the Address would come to a conclusion this afternoon. No such information came to my ears, and even if it had, it would not have affected my mind in the least. The right hon. Gentleman has just been talking about days occupied by private Membors. Why, Mr. Speaker, we had two days the week before last on general subjects.