ADJOURNMENT. (Hansard, 16 May 1890)

§ (12.31.) MR. T. P. O'CONNOR
I am not going to oppose the Motion, but I call on the hon. Baronet the Member for Evesham to witness, that I have done my best to help him to get forward with the Bill in which School Board teachers are interested, and which I believe the Government are in favour of. I undertook to assist the hon. Baronet in facilitating the progress of the measure, and if I have failed it is not from any want of zeal on my part.

§ *(12.31.) SIR R. TEMPLE (Worcester, Evesham)
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his assistance, and I hope that on some other occasion our joint efforts may be more successful.

§ (12.32.) MR. T. M. HEALY
We cannot pass this Motion without a protest against the deliberate attempt of the First Lord of the Treasury to fasten upon us responsibility for it. The right hon. Gentleman says he makes the Motion because he understands there is a desire on our part not to go on with business. So far is that from the fact that we have made an offer to the Government to proceed with non-contentious business. Among this there are the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Pleuropneumonia Bill, a Government measure they profess to be anxious to get on with, the East India (Civil Servants) Committee, the Private Bill Procedure (Scotland) Bill, and there is the Statute Law Revision Bill, all Government Orders, which they might have proceeded with, but for reasons of their own, perhaps to furnish an election cry, the Government have deliberately refused the proposal 1204 to go through the Orders, and they make this sudden Motion. We take note of their action. I suppose they have some motive in it, possibly it foreshadows an early dissolution, and an appeal to the country on the question of obstruction. If it does, I can tell the Government that they have attempted a bad piece of tactics. We made the offer to proceed with business in the usual way, and it was deliberately refused.

§ (12.33.) MR. SEXTON
If the right hon. Gentleman is unwilling to do more, perhaps he will tell us what he proposes to take between now and the adjournment for the holidays?

§ *(12.33.) MR. W. H. SMITH
The desire of the Government is to pass the Budget Bill before the holidays, and to that end we propose to proceed with it day by day. In answer to the remark of the hon. Member for Longford I may point out that we did desire to proceed with a Bill that was practically uncontested, and were met with a Motion to report Progress. I yielded to that rather than subject the Committee to a protracted discussion, and had no alternative.

§ *(12. 34.) MR. CREMER (Shoreditch, Haggerston)
I feel it my duty to make a protest against the course the Government have pursued, and, for my part, I am disposed to divide against the Motion now submitted to us, as a protest against the treatment meted out to the hon. Member for Woolwich (Colonel Hughes). If the Government did not care to utilise the three-quarters of an hour left after the Division surely they might have allowed the hon. Member the opportunity of discussing the important Motion standing in his name. It seems to me that when questions are attempted to be raised here vitally affecting the interests of thousands of our skilled artisans and labourers —I have noticed it on other occasions when efforts have been made to discuss these grievances—by some ingenious process the Motion is invariably shunted. Many of us remained in the House to-night for the purpose of supporting the hon. 1205 Member on a question which, in my view, is a far more serious one than that upon which to-night we have wasted several hours' discussion. But, whatever view may be taken of its importance, we had the reasonable hope and expectation that it would be discussed. The Government have acted in a most disingenious manner towards thousands of men whose complaints the hon. Member for Woolwich was to unfold to-night. If I get any assistance I shall register my protest by taking a Division.

§ (12.36.) MR. J. ROWLANDS (Finsbury, E.)
I rose just now to make a similar protest, and I entirely endorse my hon. Friend's remarks. It was known that many of us were waiting here to take part in the very important discussion we expected. The importance of the subject has been indicated by the questions which, from time to time, have been asked, and to a very large number of the artisan class it is of serious interest. Though, by the Rules of the House, the Motion could not technically have been made, yet in three-quarters of an hour we could have ventilated the grievances complained of, and could have extracted from the Ministerial Bench some statement as to the action the Government are prepared to take. It is not a question necessary to divide upon; it is for the Government to say if they will assent to a Committee, and then we shall know what course to take in and out of the House. Instead of this, we have, if the expression is not un-Parliamentary, been jockeyed out of the Debate. I lodge my emphatic protest against this, and, if my hon. Friend divides, I will with pleasure act as Teller with him. Then, on another question. We have tried to get the School Board Superannuation Bill through the House, and, as the hon. Member for the Scotland Division has said, it would have been possible to have taken the Second Reading to-night. We all know the 1206 deep interest taken in this measure by school teachers throughout the country, and the Second Reading might have been taken; but simply because the Government did not happen to have their way with the First Order the right hon. Gentleman turns round in dudgeon and says, there shall be no progress with anything else. I denounce this obstructive policy on the part of the Government.

§ (12.40.) MR. LABOUCHERE
I hope a Division will be taken as a protest against these tactics. We are frequently blamed for what is called wasting time, but here we are anxious and eager to do business, anxious to advance a Bill a stage, but because, for reasons that seem good to themselves, Members objected to proceeding with business unexpectedly brought on, the First Lord, in a fit of temper, makes this sudden Motion for adjournment. I think we certainly ought to divide against the Motion.

§ *(12.41.) MR. F. S. POWELL (Wigan)
I have but a single observation to make in reference to the School Board Superannuation Bill, and that is that I and others deeply interested in the work of voluntary schools should have opposed the Bill in the strongest manner possible, and the Second Reading could not have passed to-night. More than that, we have had support in our opposition from that quarter of the House from which we now hear of support to the Bill. It is a fact that hon. Members on the other side have on previous occasions raised objection to the Bill, and I have no doubt they will do the same on future occasions. It is, therefore, unfair to say that the action of the Government has in any way prevented the passing of the Bill.

§ (12.42.) MR. H. J. WILSON (Holmfirth)
It is a fact that should not pass without comment that the Government can find day after day for the purpose of providing compensation for publicans, and yet they are unwilling to afford 40 minutes for the consideration of the griev- 1207 ances of a body of public servants, whom the hon. and gallant Member for Woolwich represents. While they are prepared to spend millions in the one case—for though not now, millions are ultimately involved—they will not hear the grievances, or alleged grievances, to which the hon. Member desired to draw attention. I sincerely hope the protest will be carried to Division.

§ (12.43.) COLONEL HUGHES
I have no wish at all to provoke a fierce contention. I certainly was under the impression that it was competent for me, at least, to speak to the Motion of which I had given notice. Perhaps, Sir, you will be good enough to say whether I understand the point rightly. Is it the case that it was not possible for me, after the Division on the Motion for going into Supply, to even speak upon the second Motion? [Cries of "No."] Could I not even speak to my Motion unless the Government set up Supply a second time? [Cries of "No."] If that is the rule I must bow to it; but if I am incorrect it seems to me that somehow, in a maimer I do not understand, I have lost a right I thought I possessed and should not have lost. Perhaps, Sir, I may have a word of explanation?

§ *(12.44.) MR. SPEAKER
There was no need for the Government to set up Supply again for the purpose of enabling the hon. and gallant Member to speak; the Motion for Supply was still before the House after the Division. After the result of the Division was declared a Member of the Government rose at the Table and said, "Supply withdrawn, Supply Monday," and this I repeated from the Chair. I was not bound to call upon the hon. and gallant. Gentleman, seeing that his Motion would be an Amendment to the Motion that I leave the Chair. The hon. and gallant Gentleman did not rise when, in a load voice, I said, "Motion withdrawn, Supply Monday." This was what passed, and when the hon. and gallant Gentleman 1208 rose and said, "My Motion is not withdrawn," I said the Motion on which the hon. and gallant Member's notice gave him the right to speak was withdrawn. With the withdrawal of the Motion his right disappeared.

§ *(12.45.) SIR JULIAN GOLDSMID (St. Pancras, E.)
One question, Sir, I beg to put to you. Would it not be more convenient that the question for the withdrawal of the Motion for Supply should be put from the Chair in the same manner as ordinary questions upon which there is right of discussion? Probably in such a case no misunderstanding would have arisen. The hon. and gallant Member did not rise quickly enough, being under the impression that he would be called; and so the Motion for Supply was withdrawn apparently without objection. If, Sir, you could adopt the practice followed in the ordinary course of putting the Question "That the Motion be withdrawn, no such difficulty could arise.

§ *(12. 45.) MR. SPEAKER
The hon. Baronet will observe that I said "Motion withdrawn, Supply Monday." It was competent for any hon. Member to question that. I could not put the Question in any other way.

§ *(12. 46.) THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOB IRELAND (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,) Manchester, E.
May I ask you, Sir, would it not have been competent for the hon. Member to have made his speech on the Motion for withdrawal of Supply?

§ *MR. SPEAKER
The hon. Member being under the impression that I would call upon him did not rise. But I was not bound to call upon him, though I expected him to rise; but. when the Motion for withdrawal came, I was under the impression that the whole thing had been arranged.

§ (12.47.) MR. ILLINGWORTH (Bradford, W.)
I must say I think the Government have acted with very little consideration for one of their own supporters. They knew the hon. and gallant Gentleman had the notice on the Paper, 1209 and they should have known the importance of the subject. I do not say what line I may have taken on the case put forward; but I do say it is a gross injustice towards a great body of men outside, as well as to those who had been waiting here through the evening, to refuse to have the case heard, and it is but scant courtesy to one of their own supporters.

§ (12.48.) MR. A. J. BALFOUR
rising was met with cries of "spoken."

§ MR. T. P. O'CONNOR
I rise to order, Sir. The right hon. Gentleman has already spoken. If he asks the indulgence of the House I apprehend there will be no objection to his speaking again, but he has no right to speak again.

§ *MR. SPEAKER
Only by the indulgence of the House can a Member speak the second time. [Cries of "Ask indulgence."]

§ *MR. A. J. BALFOUR
I am quite willing to ask the indulgence of the House; but I think, Sir, you will allow that when I rose just now it was to ask your opinion on a point of order, and by doing this I am not aware that I exhausted my right of speaking. But I have no wish to insist on the right I think I possess, and I will ask the indulgence of hon. Gentlemen if they will listen to a word or two. We are attacked for a want of generosity towards those whom the hon. and gallant Gentleman so ably represents. But, in the first place, the Government have acted strictly in accordance with the usual practice; and, secondly, if the hon. and gallant Gentleman had thoroughly understood the procedure usual on these occasions, and had risen immediately after the Division had been declared, he would probably have been called upon, and he would have had the opportunity of making the statement he desires to make. He could have laid the case of the workmen in the Government establishments before the House, but he could not have made 1210 his Motion or have taken a Division. All that the hon. and gallant Gentleman could have done under any circumstances was to make his speech, and he had the opportunity under the ordinary Rules of the House had he risen. The Government strictly followed the ordinary procedure on Friday nights, and nothing that was done was intended to prevent, or could have prevented, the hon. and gallant Gentleman making that statement to which we should all have listened with great interest.

§ (12.50.) MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.)
It seems to me the Government did not follow the usual course, but a very unusual course. What occurred? The hon. Member for Woolwich did rise to address the House as soon as the opportunity offered; but a Member of the Government, availing himself of his nearer proximity to the Table, took a course utterly without parallel in my recollection of proceedings on Friday nights. The Government, knowing there was a Member behind them who had an important Motion to bring forward—and I may mention a very embarrassing Motion, indeed, for the Government—a very important matter for consideration, and knowing that he would make his statement, without taking the trouble to look round to see whether the hon. Member was prepared to rise or not, sidled up to the Table and requested the withdrawal of the original Motion for Supply before the hon. Member or anyone else was aware of what was being done. The fact is, both the hon. Member and those of us on this side, who I may perhaps say are more up to the tricks and dodges of debate than the hon. and gallant Gentleman is, were taken by surprise by the rapid manoœeuvre executed by the Government, and before we had time to appreciate the situation the right of the hon. Member for Woolwich was gone. All that I can say is, that if the Government had practised such a trick upon a Member of our Party they would hear a 1211 great deal more of it than perhaps they may from their own supporters. I am sure the Government would not dream of attempting such a trick against one of their opponents. All I can say is, during the time I have been in the House, and I have been a close observer of proceedings, I have never seen such a thing done before.

(12.54.) MR. MAC NEILL
rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put;" but Mr. SPEAKER withheld his assent, and declined then to put that Question.

§ (12.54.) MR. CHARLES DARLING (Deptford)
It was my desire to second the Motion standing in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Woolwich, and, for my own part, I do not think—and I do not think that my hon. Friend believes either—that any kind of trick has been practised against us. It is perfectly obvious that if my hon. Friend had understood what the hon. Member calls the dodges of this House, as well as hon. Members do who have made them the subject of study and practice, he might, without being called upon, and after the Government had made the Motion for withdrawal, have done exactly what he could have done before. [Cries of "No !"and "Divide !"] It will be easier to divide if I am allowed to proceed without interruption. It is perfectly obvious my hon. Friend might have made the speech he intended to make, and others interested in the subject might have followed him; but, after all, the time at our disposal was only that between 12.15 and 1 o'clock, and, I must say, I think that those who have complained that we did not proceed with the subject at 12.15 are far more anxious to make out a grievance against the Government than to have an adequate and effective discussion of the subject itself. We desired to go to a Division, but 1212 we could not have done so. ["Yes."] We could not have done so. I prefer the opinion of the Speaker to that of any hon. Member. We could not have gone to a Division. [Cries of "Agreed."] No, we are not agreed yet. What my hon. Friend and I, with others who support him, desire if we do not get the inquiry for which we ask is that we should be able to take a Division on the subject.

(12.58.) Mr. R. PHILIPPS (Lanark, Mid)
rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."

§ *MR. SPEAKER
I have not thought it right to put the Question. The Motion before the House is the Adjournment; and in two minutes I shall, in accordance with the Rules of the House, leave the Chair, and, therefore, I do not think I am called upon to put the House to the trouble of a Division.

§ MR. SEXTON
On a point of order, Sir, I would ask you whether, if the hon. Member for Woolwich had spoken after the Division, he could not have divided the House on the Main Question, that you do leave the Chair?

§ *MR. SPEAKER
Yes; the hon. Member could have challenged a Division on the Motion that I now leave the Chair, but not on his own Motion.

§ THE UNDER SECRETARY FOE INDIA (Sir J. GORST,) Chatham
May I ask you, Sir, if any Member had objected to the withdrawal of Supply could the Motion have been withdrawn without discussion?

§ *MR. SPEAKER
The Motion could not have been withdrawn under those circumstances. As I have already explained, I put the Question "Motion withdrawn," "Supply Monday." These were the words that passed my lips.