HC Deb 21 August 1894 vol 29 cc265-75

Resolutions read a second time.

First Resolution, That a sum, not exceeding £11,564, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1895, for maintaining certain Harbours, Lighthouses, &c., under the Board of Trade, considered.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."

MR. LLOYD-GEORGE (Carnarvon, &)

said, he thought the time had now arrived for the Government to postpone the further consideration of Supply. They had a late Sitting last night—they sat from 3 o'clock in the afternoon until 4 o'clock that morning—and they had been sitting now 10 hours, and he submitted they were not in a fit state to consider Report of Supply. They were practically asked to rush through something like £32,000,000 of Supply in the course of 10 hours, and he submitted that that was not a state of things which ought to commend itself to the House of Commons. There was no real reason why the Government should hurry through. If they had had a long Session there might be an excuse for this excessive hurry to bring matters to a determination; but they had had one of the shortest Sessions on record. The time had arrived, in his opinion, for postponing the consideration of these Votes.

THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. J.) MORLEY, Newcastle-upon-Tyne

said, he rather regretted the line his hon. Friend had taken. During the whole of two hours of last night they discussed more or less closely arguments in connection with the Vote for the officers of the House of Lords, and he could not conceive, from his own point of view, what his hon. Friend gained by postponing this Vote. It was clearly understood they were to take that Vote, and so much contention unfortunately arose during the early hours of that morning, on the ground that the Government had not fulfilled, as was alleged, an agreement, that he really must ask the House to go on with the Votes and bring this matter, which had caused so much contention, to a final close.

MR. DALZIEL

said, he would strongly appeal to the right hon. Gentleman as to whether he would not consent to what, after all, was a very simple demand. The demand made was simply that the Votes in Class I. up to the House of Lords should be postponed until to-morrow.

MR. J. MORLEY

said, that was exactly what they were unwilling to do.

MR. DALZIEL

said, they ought not to be asked to discuss the question of the House of Lords at that time of the night. He understood the right hon. Gentleman was prepared to assent to the postponement of the intervening Votes until they arrived at the question of the House of Lords. He differed entirely from the right hon. Gentleman when he said they exhausted the subject that morning, and they left off just where they started. But he based his Motion on the still broader ground that having sat till 4 o'clock the previous morning, having then sat from 3 o'clock in the afternoon continuously till 1 o'clock in the morning, it was really too much of the Government to expect they were going to discuss anything at all after the long Sitting in which they had been engaged. He recognised that anyone who, at this period of the Session, desired to discuss anything at all was regarded, perhaps not unjustly, by a large section of the House as an intruder. They were kept there day after day until a very late hour for the transaction of Government business; they had consented to their own private opportunities being taken away from them to further the Government business; and at the end of the Session, when every Member was looking forward to a holiday, they were asked to sacrifice their remaining opportunities in order to conduce to the general convenience of the House. He considered that having regard to the amount of money that had already been approved of to-night, and to the fact that, after all, they ought still to give some consideration to the questions that arose in Supply, the time had now arrived when the Debate should be adjourned. He, therefore, moved that the Debate be now adjourned.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned."—(Mr. Dalziel.)

MR. KEARLEY (Devonport)

thought the time had arrived when they should make some protest against being kept there. Supply did not receive that amount of consideration and attention it deserved. Although he should be very sorry indeed to put any obstacle in the way of the Government getting on with their business he did say there ought to be some combined effort on the part of Members on all sides of the House to endeavour to see that they had an opportunity of discussing Supply at a proper period of the Session, and in a complete manner. There were in Supply most important questions, probably far more important than much of the legislation they had to deal with from time to time. It had, however, become the practice to induce Members to give up their right to discuss Supply on the Votes, and to ask them to take the discussion on the Report stage. Last night, at midnight, he had possession of the House when the Naval Vote was before them, and he was asked to forego his right of speaking at that stage and allow the Vote to be taken, he being assured that there would be a full opportunity of discussing the question on the Report stage. That day had gone; they had entered upon another day, and here they had a full array of Ministers all dying with anxiety to get hon. Members to abstain from bringing matters forward and to sacrifice their rights. He thought the time had come when they should vigorously protest against this. He had no doubt it would be a serious inconvenience to continue the Sittings of the House for one more day, but he thought the Government would be wise to give way to what was practically the unanimous desire of the House.

MR. J. MORLEY

did not agree that it was practically the unanimous desire of the House that the Debate should be now adjourned. He would point out to his hon. Friend that the complaint made against the Government the previous morning was that at 2 o'clock in the morning they did not take this Vote relating to the House of Lords. It was now the comparatively modest hour of 1 o'clock, and the complaint was that the Government desired to take it up. He would point out that they were not going to discuss the question of a Second Chamber or anything of that kind. There was a discussion the other night, to some extent, upon a particular point raised by his hon. Friends from Ireland. They wished to make a protest—a very just and proper protest—against the action taken in the House of Lords on a particular measure. The gentlemen who were specially concerned had entered that protest, and they did not wish to discuss the general question of the House of Lords on so very narrow an issue. The hon. Member who had last spoken had said that the necessity of Supply being taken at a reasonable period of the Session when there were opportunities for discussion was more important than many of their legislative projects.

MR. KEARLEY

I said it possibly might be more important.

MR. J. MORLEY

said, he had heard that kind of language during the length of years that he had had the honour of a seat in that House, but he submitted that when they were within two or three days of the Prorogation of Parliament the argument was not a good one on the present occasion, and the Government felt bound to resist the Motion for the Adjournment of the Debate.

DR. CLARK

wanted to know how long the right hon. Gentleman meant to keep them up this morning? Yesterday morning the position was somewhat different to what it was this morning, because the previous morning they had not to meet again until 3 o'clock in the afternoon, whereas to-day they had to meet at 12 o'clock noon, and they had yet got to go home, sleep, and have breakfast. He thought it was only fair, under these circumstances, that they should have time given them to do these things when they were going to meet three hours earlier than they met yesterday. He did not see why they should be kept up any longer, seeing that they were going to do the work to-morrow. If it had been necessary to finish that night he could have understood it, but it was not. They were going to have another day. He did not suppose the Scottish Local Government Bill would take more than two or three hours, and all the rest of the time could be devoted to completing the remainder of the work instead of taking an hour or two at the present time. He thought it was time hon. Members were allowed to go home, seeing that they had to return in the middle of the day.

Question put.

The House divided:—Ayes 39; Noes 83.—(Division List, No. 244.)

Resolution agreed to.

Resolutions Two, Three, Four, and Five postponed.

Sixth Resolution, That a sum, not exceeding £22,595, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1895, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Offices of the House of Lords, considered.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."

MR. DALZIEL

rose to move to reduce the Vote by the sum of £20,000. He regretted that proper time had not been given by the Government to discuss the action the House of Lords had thought proper to pursue with regard to the Evicted Tenants Bill. He pressed the Government to give some definite indication of what their policy was to be with regard to the present form of that Chamber. He could not feel that the Government would be surprised that they were anxious for more light upon this matter. At the very commencement of the present Session, in one of the very earliest pronouncements, this House, by a majority, decided to make a representation to Her Majesty that the power of the House of Lords should be curtailed for reasons which—

MR. SPEAKER

Order, order! The hon. Gentleman is not now in Order.

MR. DALZIEL

should not pursue that line of argument further. He was under the impression that this Vote being asked for the House of Lords, they might have upon it based a demand as to what the policy of the Government was to be. However, he would come in a different line towards the same question, and he would ask the Government whether, in view of the action of the House of Lords with regard to the measures which had been passed by a majority of this House, they did not consider in the interests of the Government themselves, in the interests of the House of Commons, and in the interests of the country, that they should at the present time know what their policy was to be in regard to that Chamber? Of course, he did not ask the Government on a great constitutional question such as that undoubtedly was to deal with it in a light-hearted fashion, but he did think, in view of the action of that Chamber, and in view of its absolute use-lessness—

MR. SPEAKER

Order, order! The hon. Member is not in Order. He is not entitled to speak of the other branch of the Legislature in those terms. The Question before the House is the reduction of the Vote for the officers of the other House. The hon. Member consulted me privately, and I told him he was entitled to ask a question as to what the Government proposed to do, but to discuss the policy or action of the House of Lords upon a question of the reduction of the Vote for the salaries of the officers of the House of Lords is, I think, out of Order.

MR. DALZIEL

said, he would simply confine himself to asking the Government whether they could, on the present occasion, now that they were practically at the end of the Session, give them some indication of what their policy in the future was to be with regard to the other Chamber. He did not ask them to pledge themselves to introduce a Bill dealing with the powers of that Assembly. He only asked them two things: In the first place, that they would undertake, during the existence of the present Parliament, and, if possible, during the next Session, to lay upon the Table of the House a Resolution embodying their policy with regard to the matter; and, in the second place, he asked for a declaration—and he thought they were entitled to receive it—that when this Resolution was laid upon the Table they should deal with the question in such a way as to make this Chamber absolutely supreme in all matters of legislation.

MR. SPEAKER

pointed out that it was not necessary to move the reduction, which would be tantamount to opposing the whole Vote.

MR. WARNER (Somerset, N.),

as one who had always been ready to support the Government through their Estimates, could not help expressing the reasons why on this Vote he should support his hon. Friend. It was quite true that this was only a Vote for paying Civil servants. But they were the Civil servants that were employed in the other Chamber, and the discussion that took place last night, and the unfortunate incidents attending it, alone had made it a sort of Vote of Confidence in the other House. If they required any further proof of that it was afforded by the way the Opposition Benches had been filled up by those who were ready to come here to support what had been described that day as the Permanent Committee of the Conservative Party. When a Vote was asked for which had to be supported by the advocates of that Committee, and when the Government were relying upon them, he felt that, as a Radical, one was bound to vote even against a Liberal Government that required such support and were ready to take this Vote in such a way as to make it really one of confidence in the House of Lords.

MR. WEIR

said, the right hon. Gentleman who was leading the House stated some time ago that the Irish Members had lodged their protest against the House of Lords. So much for the Irish Members. The House had heard the protest of the Irish Celts and also the Welsh Celts, and now he, speaking on behalf of the Celts of the Highlands of Scotland, demanded to know from the Government what they intended to do with the House of Lords, which frustrated the business of the country and prevented the advance of legislation. He hoped to be in the Highlands in a few days, and while there expected to attend a conference of Highlanders from all parts of the mainland and the islands. Those people would naturally wish to know from him what the Government were going to do with the House of Lords. He therefore desired to know from the present Leader of the House (Mr. J. Morley) what action the Government intended to take? He trusted Radical Members would not leave the House without a clear and candid statement from the right hon. Gentleman.

MR. LLOYD-GEORGE

said, it was due to the supporters of the Government that the Government should give some answer to the appeal made to them by their followers as to what they intended to do with the House of Lords. So far the only answer the supporters of the Government had had on a question that agitated the country—a question in which the Liberal Party of the country took a deep concern—was an arrangement between the two Front Benches by which the Government brought down the Tory Party in a body to vote down their own supporters. It would be a very unsatisfactory thing if the supporters of the Government had to tell their constituents that the only thing the Government had done was to enter into an alliance with the Tory Party to burke discussion on the House of Lords.

MR. J. MORLEY

My hon. Friend who has just sat down has given a version of the situation which is a long way removed from the truth.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

Hear, hear!

MR. J. MORLEY

There has been no transaction between right hon. Gentlemen opposite and the Government such as he has described.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

Hear, hear!

MR. J. MORLEY

And I cannot conceive upon what facts, or supposed facts, such an allegation is made. It is said the vote about to be taken is a Vote of Confidence or No Confidence in the House of Lords. If that were so, the Members of the Government and our supporters would all be found in the same Lobby; but it is because the Government feel the gravity and magnitude of the question of the House of Lords that we decline to enter on an issue so great on the trumpery question of the salaries of the officials of the House of Lords. If it is raised, as assuredly it will be raised, in the House of Commons—it has already been raised in the country—it must be raised on an issue and on a proposition worthy of the magnitude of the question concerned. That is the position of the Government. As the Chancellor of the Exchequer said last night, we were so alive to the gravity of this question—we know how those who support the Government have this question at heart—that we ought not to be induced to deal with it, or enter on a serious discussion of it on a question of this kind. What my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer said last night I repeat now in regard to dealing with this great constitutional question. The time and the manner of dealing with this great question is a point the Government must settle themselves, and one which we intended to consider and discuss among ourselves during the Recess. Whatever propositions might be the fruit of that consideration, the present was not the time nor the issue on which the question should be raised. Hon. Members below the Gangway will admit that we would be making ourselves ridiculous if upon a Vote of this kind we were to raise, at the fag-end of the Session, within three or four days of the Prorogation, this great constitutional question. I do not think hon. Members below the Gangway are serious. [Opposition cheers and Radical cries of "Oh, oh!"] Of course they are absolutely serious in their intention to press this question on the attention of the constituencies and upon Her Majesty's Government, but what I mean to say is that the Government cannot at this time of the Session be expected to bring forward their proposals on one of the gravest constitutional issues ever raised in the history of this country. If there is one Minister on this Bench likely to feel strongly on the action of another place I am that Minister. But I will not press that consideration on the House at this moment. My hon. Friends below the Gangway know perfectly well that the Government are fully alive to the gravity—the pressing gravity—of this question. We do indeed feel the great responsibility of deciding what steps shall be taken in the matter, and I can only assure hon. Members that it is receiving our most careful consideration. So long as in another place they persist in resisting measures dealing with Ireland, they make it an actual and pressing question for the consideration of any Liberal Government—whether this one or any one that may follow. Under these circumstances, I hope my hon. Friends will believe that we have this subject fully before our minds, that we are considering it, and must consider it, because if we did not wish to do so—which is not the case—the feeling of the country binds us to consider it.

MR. SEXTON

said, he hoped the Tory Party who had attended in such phenomenal numbers—phenomenal considering the stage of the Session and the engagements of those hon. Gentlemen elsewhere—would allow the few hon. Members who wished to express their opinions on such an important matter to do so without interruption, or otherwise the Debate must be prolonged. The question at issue was one which excited the passions of Irish Members as well as their interest. It was said in the course of the Debate on the Evicted Tenants' Bill in the House of Lords that that Bill should be rejected because the Irish votes were cast for it. The Bill was an Irish Bill, and it was extremely natural that the Irish votes should be given upon it; and when language of that sort was made the justification for the rejection by the Lords of Bills relating to Ireland, it would be understood why any question relating to the maintenance of the House of Lords should be regarded by the Irish Members as of primary importance. He knew that the existence and functions of the House of Lords could not properly be brought into the present Debate; but he regretted that, considering the length of time that had elapsed since the House of Lords came into direct conflict with the House of Commons upon the main point of policy upon which the Government was put in power, and the urgent pleas of their most ardent and faithful followers in the House who most directly represented the pervading feeling of Liberalism in this country, the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues had nothing more explicit to say than that they were sensible of the gravity and urgency of the question. He regretted that the Government had not seen their way to define their policy in this matter in some clear and satisfactory way. He thought it was not enough for them to say that they were sensible of the gravity of the question. To say that the Government was not sensible of the gravity of the question would be to say that they were not honest politicians. He regarded them as honest politicians; he believed they were determined as far as men could to carry the policy they meant to pursue into effect; but what he complained of was that they did not engage themselves more directly and more earnestly in the consideration of this great question, and did not give satisfaction to their followers in that House and in the country by informing them in some specific terms at what time they would proceed, and what would be the mode of their action. He thought there was something in the aspect of the House which rendered debate superfluous. The most unskilled observer must be struck by the altered aspect of the House. Last night the Tory Party were substantially absent; last night the Government were determined not to go to a Division on the Vote for the House of Lords because last night they could not rely on the Liberal Party to carry that Vote. To-night, by what means he knew not, except, as was the talk of the Lobbies, it was by a system of broken pairs—a system by which Liberals and Tories paired with each other broke their pairs—so that they might vote for the House of Lords—but whatever the means there was a remarkable attendance of the Tory Party; and the circumstance that the Government took advantage of that attendance of the Tory Party to take the Vote of the House of Lords was a circumstance of such force and significance as to render debate superfluous.

Question put.

The House divided:—Ayes 76; Noes 45.—(Division List, No. 245.)

Seventh, Eighth, and Ninth Resolutions agreed to.

Resolutions Ten and Eleven postponed.

Twelfth, Thirteenth, Fourteenth, Fifteenth, Sixteenth, Seventeenth, and Eighteenth Resolutions agreed to.

Resolutions Nineteen and Twenty postponed.

Postponed Resolutions to be considered To-morrow.