§ MR. CHANNING (Northampton, E.)I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury what course he proposes to take as to the Motion for a Select Committee to inquire into agricultural depression?
§ MR. W. E. GLADSTONEI have to express my regret that a sense of duty induced some hon. Members opposite to prevent, during the earlier available part of the Session, the appointment of the Committee for which the Government intended to ask the House. I think the date at which we have now arrived justifies my hon. Friend behind me in putting this question. I am also bound to admit that there would be no use in attempting the proposal of a Committee at this period of the year. At the same time, what has happened is this: The case of agriculture in certain parts of the country, I think, is certainly more hopeful and favourable than it was at the time when the Government projected the Committee. But in other portions, and I am afraid large and considerable portions, of the country, the case is even more urgent now than it has been. The method of inquiry by a Committee would not be open to them; and the Government, having considered the matter, are of opinion that it would be desirable that they should advise Her Majesty to assent to the appointment of a Royal Com- 977 mission in order that the inquiry may not drop altogether to the ground.
§ MR. CHAPLIN (Lincolnshire, Sleaford)May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he can state to the House what was the cause of the extraordinary delay which has occurred on the part of the Government in taking this decision; and whether it has not been open to the Government for several months to move for the appointment of the Committee on any single day they pleased?
§ MR. W. E. GLADSTONEWe were of opinion—and after we had ceased to entertain a strong impression we still cherished the hope—that good sense would prevail over prejudice, and that the Government would be permitted to appoint their Committee. I think it was complimentary to the House and to the right hon. Gentleman that the Government did not readily abandon that hope, and it was their clinging to that hope as long as there was still enough of the ordinary Session remaining to warrant any idea that there could be useful inquiry by a Committee which has been the reason of what the right hon. Gentleman calls "the extraordinary delay" that has occurred. Perhaps it is an extraordinary delay, and, if so, it is one for the credit of producing which the right hon. Gentleman is principally entitled.
§ MR. CHAPLINThe right hon. Gentleman has carefully avoided giving any answer whatever to the second part of the question which I asked him, and which I now repeat. The question was, whether it has not been perfectly open to the Government during several months to move for the appointment of the Committee upon any single day they pleased?
§ MR. W. E. GLADSTONEIt was open to Her Majesty's Government, not on any single day that they pleased, but on certain days in any week, to move for the appointment of the Committee; but they would have done that at the expense of putting aside what they deemed still more vital and essential business, promoted by those who are conscientiously desirous of making progress with the main business.
§ MR. CHAPLINI wish to ask only one further question in order that, we may clearly know the feeling of the Go- 978 vernment. It is whether, in the opinion of the Government, the terrible agricultural depression through which the country has been passing for months is not, as compared with the Home Rule Bill, deserving of one single day's discussion?
§ MR. W. E. GLADSTONEIn my opinion, the discussion on the appointment of the Committee would have been pure waste of time, although the proposal of the Committee was, in our view, very proper, and might have been highly beneficial. We were not disposed to devote any portion of the Session to pure waste of time.