HC Deb 23 March 1891 vol 351 cc1679-82
MR. J. E. ELLIS (Nottingham, Rushcliffe)

Will the Motion for the Adjournment be made at the commencement of the Sitting to-morrow?

*MR. W. H. SMITH

No, not necessarily. It may be necessary to advance one or two Bills before the Motion is made.

MR. J. LOWTHER (Kent, Thanet)

As there are a great many Notices down on the Motion to go into Committee of Supply, and as the first Order, the Committee regarding Scotch Private Bill Procedure, is apparently likely to give rise to some discussion, may I ask on what day after Easter the Government will set down the Order for Supply, Civil Service Estimates?

*MR. W. H. SMITH

It is not usual for the appointment of a Committee to take a very long time, and I hope that in an hour and a half's time we may be able to proceed with the Civil Service Estimates.

MR. SHAW LEFEVRE (Bradford, Central)

I took exception to a like course being adopted on the Navy Estimates, and the First Lord of the Treasury gave way. I must now ask whether it is not the case that there is no precedent for putting down Supply as the second Order?

MR. E. ROBERTSON (Dundee)

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is aware that the majority of Scotch Members left town on the understanding that the Scotch Private Bill Committee would not be taken to-night?

VISCOUNT WOLMER (Hants, Petersfield)

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the proposal to nominate the Committee before the Easter adjournment has created great satisfaction in Scotland?

MR. LABOUCHERE (Northampton)

And I will ask whether, in case the Speaker is got out of the Chair to-night, it is intended to take effective Supply?

*MR. W. H. SMITH

No, Sir, it is not intended to do that. There is no rule against moving the Speaker out of the Chair as the second Order of the Day, when it is preceded simply by the question of the nomination of a Committee. I gave notice early in the week that if the Scotch Committee was not appointed before Easter it would not be taken until the Thursday after Easter; and, in answer to a question, I gave notice on Friday that I should propose it to-day, being aware, as the noble Lord has stated, that there is a strong feeling in Scotland in favour of the Committee being appointed. I am only keeping my engagement, therefore, with the House in putting down the Committee for to-day. The Member for Stirling Burghs spoke to me privately on Friday, and I told him, as I told other hon. Gentlemen, that the Government intended to proceed with the Motion on Monday. I should be exceedingly sorry if Scotch Members are not present, but I repeat I have given full notice, and I must adhere to the arrangement.

MR. BRYCE (Aberdeen, S.)

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he did not state on Thursday that the Private Bill Procedure Committee would be nominated on Friday, and whether it is not within his knowledge that a large number of Scotch Members, relying on that statement, arranged to leave town on Saturday morning?

*MR. W. H. SMITH

The hon. Gentleman is well aware that though I may propose I cannot dispose of the time of the House. I certainly had no expectation that the proceedings on the Welsh Tithe Bill, with regard to one clause, would be protracted as they were. Owing to that fact, it was impossible to take the Motion on Friday.

MR. CALDWELL (Glasgow, St. Rollox)

Was there not an hour and a half available on Friday when the Motion might have been taken?

*MR. W. H. SMITH

I do not wish to impute anything to the hon. Gentlemen who differ from me in my views, but I had reason to believe that the opportunity would be taken to talk out the discussion on that night.

MR. H. H. FOWLER (Wolverhampton, E.)

When the right hon. Gentleman stated on Thursday that if the Motion was not taken on Friday it would not be taken till after Easter, did not the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Stirling Burghs make arrangements to leave England on Saturday, so that when it was decided to bring that on today it was too late for him to alter them?

*MR. W. H. SMITH

I should be exceedingly sorry if the right hon. Gentleman misunderstood me. Bat if reference was made to the record it will be seen that my statement was that if the Motion for the Committee was not taken before Easter it would not be taken till the Thursday after. Moreover, no suggestion was made to me of an objection being raised at a sitting like this, which is a day before the adjournment.

MR. FLNLAY (Inverness, &c.)

I hope the right hon. Gentleman will persevere with the Motion, as great interest is taken in the matter in Scotland.

SIR W. LAWSON

What business will be taken before the Motion for the adjournment for the holidays is made?

*MR. W. H. SMITH

I hope the Motion for the Adjournment will be reached at a Morning Sitting to-morrow. The course will be to move that the House after a Sitting on Wednesday, or perhaps, Thursday—because the Government can hardly tell when the Commission will arrive for the Royal Assent—adjourn until Monday, April 6. It is not intended to proceed with any business at the Sitting on Wednesday or Thursday, whichever may be the day fixed for the Royal Assent to the Tithe and other Bills. The Commission will make a House, and therefore no quorum of Members will be necessary.

MR. W. E. GLADSTONE

Will the First Lord of the Treasury be good enough to say what Bills will be advanced before the Motion for Adjournment?

*MR. W. H. SMITH

The Mail Ships Bill, the Electoral Disabilities Removal Bill, and one or two others.

MR. D. CRAWFORD (Lanark, N.E.)

What Supply will be taken when the House resumes?

*MR. W. H. SMITH

Class I. of the Civil Service Estimates.

SIR J. SWINBURNE

Will the Tithes Bill come before the House again prior to the holidays?

*MR. W. H. SMITH

Yes, Sir; we have reason to believe it will be before us to-morrow.