§ MR. W. E. GLADSTONE (Edinburgh, Midlothian)Perhaps I may be permitted to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he can give us any information with respect to next week, and when we may expect to go into Committee on the Small Holdings Bill?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURMy hope is, unless business to-day and to-morrow takes a most unsatisfactory turn, that we may on Monday continue and finish with the Committee stage of the Small Holdings Bill. The only possible exception I imagine to the continued discussion on that stage will be that hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite may desire the Budget discussion. I may say that I have received a private communication from the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Derby, who is anxious that the Debate should not be taken before Thursday next, and I shall not, therefore, in any case, take it before that day.
§ MR. SEXTONI wish to make an inquiry partly as to order and partly in the interest of the convenience of the House. The House will observe that the name of the Attorney General appears in connection with the discharge of an Order on the Criminal Evidence Bill. The House has already gone into Committee on that Bill, and I wish to ask whether it is in accordance with usage, under those circumstances, that there should be a Motion to abolish the Committee stage of the Bill? Then as to the question of convenience. The right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the House will remember that last Tuesday he said the first business to-day would be the Committee on the Criminal Evidence Bill, or so we understood him. Upon that understanding Members have prepared their Amendments, and, coming down with the intention of proceeding with the Committee stage, find themselves confronted with a Motion to abolish the Committee stage of the Bill, by placing it before a Law 192 Committee upstairs. I should like to know whether that is considered fair and convenient?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI understand the hon. Member makes two complaints against me. One is as to the answer I gave on Tuesday.
§ MR. SEXTONNot against you.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI, however, am responsible for the alteration, and, therefore, am the one who must reply. The answer I then made is clear in my recollection, although it had to be given at a great speed owing to the hour. I stated that the first Order would be the Criminal Evidence Bill, but I did not say the Committee stage. I understand, in addition to that, the hon. Member thinks I have not given sufficient notice, and he says that the Motion only appeared on the Paper this morning. That is undoubtedly true. I have thought, and still think, that a formal application of this kind of Notice is not required. The last desire I have is to force out any discussion, and, after the appeal made to me by the hon. Member, I shall be prepared to take the Motion as first Order tomorrow instead of to-day.
§ MR. KNOXI wish to know whether it will be competent for any Member, upon this Motion being put, to give Notice to-day that on the Motion being put to-morrow he will move an Instruction?
§ MR. SPEAKERNotice for an Instruction to a Standing Committee will not attach to any Order of the Day, but will be an independent Motion.
§ MR. SEXTONThen if the Bill were referred to a Standing Committee, it would be competent afterwards to move an Instruction to the Committee?
§ *MR. SPEAKERIt would be perfectly in order.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOUROn a point of order, and to prevent any misconception, do I understand your ruling to be that the Notice of Motion which is made by a Private Member would stand with Private Motions, and would come on with them, and would not come next in order to the Government Notice? I thought the hon. Gentleman gathered that he would have a right, if the Motion were carried, to 193 move this Instruction. I understand your ruling to be that would not be so—that he would only have the privilege of a Private Member, and would have to ballot for his place.
§ *MR. SPEAKERI said a Motion for an Instruction would be an independent Motion, without precedence.
§ MR. SEXTONThen it will be merely a matter of chance, and the right of a Member to move an Instruction to a Committee of this House will be destroyed?
§ *MR. SPEAKERNotice will have to be given of the Instruction. The Motion will be subject to the ballot, I understand the hon. Member asked me as to a point of order.
§ MR. SEXTONI wish to know whether it is in order to move to discharge an Order in Committee upon a Bill the House has already gone into?
§ *MR. SPEAKERIt is unusual, but no progress was actually made.
§ MR. KNOXAs it appears from the Notice Paper to-day, progress had actually been made with this Bill. The Chairman had reported Progress on the 4th April.
§ *MR. SPEAKERThat is the technical expression. The Chairman of Committees must report something. He reports "Progress" although no progress may have been actually made—no progress, in the present case, was actually made.
§ Motion postponed till To-morrow.
§ *MR. GOSCHENThere is a Notice of Motion standing in my name for to-night, as to the Financial Relations of England, Scotland, and Ireland, and I think I may persuade my right hon. Friend to stop the Business of the House at about eleven o'clock this evening. It would then be competent for any other hon. Member to bring on the Orders of the Day, and, if so, we might be able to get to the Motion. If it is impossible to bring it on before twelve o'clock, my right hon. Friend may suspend Government business at six o'clock to-morrow in order to take the Motion. My right hon. Friend says, however, there must be a distinct understanding that unless there is fair progress with business we shall not be able to stop.