§ MR. CHANNING (Northampton,E.)I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, having regard to the urgent necessity of making sufficient progress at a early period of the Session with the Registration Bill, Welsh Suspensory Bill, Parish Councils Bill, and other Government measures, to insure legislation this Session, he will consider the advisability of taking either the whole of Tuesday or Friday for Government Business, or of beginning immediately with Morning Sittings for Government Business on both Tuesdays and Fridays?
§ MR. W. E. GLADSTONEIt may be convenient for me to take this opportunity of stating the intention of the Government with regard to Public Business. It is our intention on Monday to propose that we should become sharers in the public time available on Tuesdays and Fridays by means of Morning Sittings. We shall ask for that power from the House, as it was asked for by the late Government last year, till Easter, when the matter may be re-considered. I have also an announcement to make with regard to these Morning Sittings, which may convey some satisfaction to the minds of Independent Members. The old Rule was that on Fridays at 9 o'clock, after a Morning Sitting, the Government were responsible for making and keeping a House. That Rule has by some process, which I will not attempt to explain, fallen into disuse and neglect. We propose to revive that Rule, and make ourselves responsible for making and keeping a House on Fridays. With respect to the Evening Sitting on Tuesday, we propose to go as far as to be responsible for making a House at 9 o'clock. Then, Sir, we propose on Monday to take, first, the introduction of the Local Veto Bill and, second, the Employers' Liability Bill. I do not mean to draw any absolute line as to all these Bills; but after they are disposed of, we propose to go forward with the Supplementary Estimates in Supply, and to make them the Main Business as nearly as we can till they are disposed of.
§ MR. SETON-KARR (St. Helen's)May I ask whether the Government cannot give a little more time for the consideration of the Employers' Liability Bill, or does the right hon. Gentleman 198 seriously mean to consider it along with two or three other important measures on Monday night?
§ MR. GOSCHEN (St. George's, Hanover Square)I desire, also, to ask whether the notice given by the right hon. Gentleman for taking the time of the House will be confined to the Financial Business of the House according to the precedent set by the late Government last year? I wish further to ask whether it will not be possible for the right hon. Gentleman to bring on his Motion on Tuesday, rather than on Monday, in view of the great interest that is taken in the Motion with reference to bimetallism, which stands on the Paper for Tuesday night? The time available between 9 o'clock and midnight will, as the right hon. Gentleman must be aware, be quite inadequate for the discussion of such an important subject. In view of the International Monetary Conference having been postponed, it is urgent that the matter should be brought to a head, as the action of members of the Conference may, to some extent, be determined by the attitude of the House, seeing that the Government have entered into negotiations with other countries on the question. The matter really deserves the earnest attention of the Government.
§ MR. W. E. GLADSTONEIt appears to me the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman partake rather of the nature of argument than of a question. We are compelled to look to the condition of Public Business as a whole, and we do not think that there was any failure to deal with the question of bimetallism on the occasion when it was discussed last year. The lamented Leader of the House at that date made a speech which appeared to me to contribute very largely, indeed, towards the conclusion of the Debate. However, I do not intend to enter into that argument; but I may say that the Government feel it to be their duty, looking at the condition of Business at the present time, to go forward with the notice which I have given. Hon. Gentlemen will appreciate the pledge that has been entered into for the first time on the part of the Government with regard to making a House when it meets at 9 o'clock.
§ MR. GOSCHENAnd with regard to Financial Business, will the precedent of last year be followed?
§ MR. W. E. GLADSTONENo, Sir; we do not think any great convenience would be gained by that arrangement, and I think we had better leave matters where they are.
§ MR. SETON-KARRI hope the right hon. Gentleman will give an answer to my question as to the Employers' Liability Bill.
§ MR. W. E. GLADSTONEIf there were a general desire on the part of the House, it would be the duty of the Government to take account of it; but I am bound to say that I do not think that is the case. As far as the Second Reading of the Bill is concerned, there is, I believe, a very general desire to see it read a second time.
§ MR. SETON-KARRAm I to understand that the right hon. Gentleman seriously proposes to discuss the rights of private Members, the question of the Direct Veto, Employers' Liability, and a portion of Supply on the same day?
§ MR. W. E. GLADSTONEYes, Sir.