§ MR. FRANCIS EVANS (Southampton),who had given notice of the following Amendment:—
That, whilst fully recognising the obligation in this country to protect French subjects in the enjoyment of their fishing rights, under the Treaty of Utrecht, on the western and northeastern shores of Newfoundland, this House deems it equally incumbent on the Government to protect Her Majesty's Colonial subjects in the general use and enjoyment of all their territorial and maritime rights on these coasts; that the terms of arbitration having proved unacceptable to Newfoundland, it is advisable that the arbitration be withdrawn or its terms reconsidered with the assistance of the Government of Newfoundland; and that means should meanwhile be sought to relieve the Colony from the depression consequent on the existence of these unsettled differences, and on account of the heavy losses sustained in the recent calamitous fires,1663 said, the questions involved in his proposal were now under discussion in the Newfoundland Legislature, and he was informed by Her Majesty's Government that the premature discussion in the House of Commons of those questions might be, and probably would be, prejudicial to the public interests of the people of Newfoundland and the people of this country. It was his earnest desire to facilitate as much as he could the friendly settlement between the Colony of Newfoundland, Great Britain, and France of the various claims and obligations they were under in relation to the Treaty of Utrecht and subsequent Treaties, but he was by that consideration precluded from proceeding with his Motion. He trusted he might express the hope that Her Majesty's Government would, in consideration of the postponement of the Motion, give their attention to the urgent and pressing needs of the people of Newfoundland, and remember the distress from which they were suffering from the recent calamitous fires, and from the existing condition of things in relation to the difficulties in France.
MR. GIBSON BOWLES (Lynn Regis)said, he had intended seconding the Motion, and inasmuch as the hon. Member had run away from it, and he (Mr. Bowles) considered it extremely urgent, he wished to know from Mr. Speaker whether it would be in Order for him to move it?
§ MR. SPEAKERNo; a Motion of this kind is the exclusive property of the hon. Member who has put it down, and in whose name it stands.
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKE (Gloucester, Forest of Dean)said, it was evidently impossible for the hon. Member to go on with his Motion in face of the declaration of the Government that in their opinion a discussion upon it would be contrary to the interests of the country and the Colony. At the same time, the ground given was only that the matter was under discussion in the Legislature of Newfoundland, and not the usual reason, that negotiations were going on with any Foreign Powers. The discussions which were proceeding in Newfoundland showed that pressure was being brought to bear in the Colony by the threat of an Act of the Imperial Legislature. He could only say that there were many Members of that House who 1664 would give the hottest possible opposition to any measure for the coercion of the Newfoundland Legislature.