RESOLUTION. (Hansard, 5 June 1894)

§ MR. MACLURE (Lancashire, S.E., Stretford)
said, that in rising to propose the Resolution which stood in his name for the adjournment of the House over Derby Day he did so with the natural modesty which had always distinguished him in that House. He very greatly regretted that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was on the previous night unable assent to this proposal, not only in the interests of the Members but also of the officials of the House. The longer Parliamentary experience of the right hon. Gentleman might, no doubt, have enabled him to discover a sufficient reason for the refusal, but from the point of view of hon. Members, some of whom had not always voted against the Government, and for the sake of the officials, he might reasonably have consented to give them one day's holiday, particularly when they wanted to do honour to the Prime Minister, for whom they all had such regard as a great supporter of their national sports. He quite admitted that the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer and himself were not so young as on an occasion some years since when they came careering to the House to support 430 such a Motion as this. To him it was a matter of perfect indifference whether the House adjourned or not; to the Derby he would go. He had not missed that event for 30 years, and he was not going to miss it at his present advanced period of life. He looked upon the Derby as an exact specimen of all the national sports. He never had a bet on a race in his life; and as a Churchwarden, and a member of the House of Laymen of the Province of York, he saw no harm in his witnessing a national sport conducted on highly moral principles. He sincerely wished that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had consented to go down in the special train to-morrow. He would have been an adornment to that train, and he would have enjoyed a well-deserved holiday. He appealed to the Government to show that they were for once liberal and generous, to give them a day's holiday, which they, and especially the officials, so much needed. He admitted that practices of a most objectionable character had been introduced into the national sports. There might be a certain amount of betting. He reprobated that very strongly, but were they to give up cricket because there was betting at cricket matches? He ventured to assert that if they did not uphold their national sports England would not maintain her present position. He knew that a number of Irish Members would not vote against this Motion. He relied on the promises which had been made to him; he did not believe that they would be broken, and he would therefore move the adjournment of the House over Derby Day.

§ MR. CHAPLIN (Lincolnshire, Sleaford)
I rise to second the Motion of my hon. Friend. I am delighted to hear that my hon. Friend is going to the Derby, but let me give him one word of warning, and that is to take the precaution of pairing if he does not succeed in carrying his Motion. There are special reasons why the House should look with favour on this proposal. No Parliament, certainly in my time, has ever had to bear such a strain and such a tax as the present Parliament. We sat for 11 months out of the 12 last year, and if any serious attempt is to be made on the part of the Government to carry even the most pressing of their measures the House will have to sit for something 431 like 11 months during the present year. I submit, in these circumstances, that the loss of a Wednesday Sitting could not make a very material difference to the progress of Government business, while it would make a great difference to the over-worked Members of the House, and to the wearied officials, to whom my hon. Friend has referred in such feeling terms. We should all benefit both in health and temper by a holiday.

§ SIR W. HARCOURT
That depends upon whether you win or lose.

§ MR. CHAPLIN
I can picture to myself the scene and the ovation that will follow the hoisting of the number of the horse of the Prime Minister. Just consider what it will be! I can see the winner led back to the scales, with the Prime Minister on the one side, and the stalwart form of the right hon. Gentleman opposite on the other, with head erect, and proud, defiant eye, flashing a warning all around—the sort of thing we often see when he rises to address is on favourable occasions—and there would be something very much worse and more serious than graduated Death Duties if anyone should venture to lift even a finger against the favourite until the welcome words "All right!" have been given. I think that the right hon. Gentleman might consider on this occasion the appeal we desire to make to him. Of course, there are different ways of doing it. You must take a Division. That I grant you. There is the Nonconformist conscience to consider. I have observed that the Nonconformist conscience is pretty tough when any political advantage is to be gained, and there can be no doubt as to the political advantage that would result from Ladas winning the Derby. I think it would only be necessary to give a wink to the Whips. The Government, as has happened before, would be defeated, and we might all go to the Derby in peace and comfort. Just one word in reply to an objection that has often been urged in the House, and, no doubt, will be urged again, for I see the warning face of the hon. Baronet (Sir W. Lawson) opposite. "Why," it is asked, "should the House of Commons be called upon to adjourn merely for a horse race?" There is a good and serious reply to be made to that. Everybody will admit that it is a matter of 432 first-rate importance to a country like this that we should preserve a first-rate breed of horses. Up to this time this has always been done by private enterprise in this country. In recent years foreign countries have become quite alive to the advantage of maintaining such a breed of horses; and enormous efforts have been made by these foreign Governments with all the advantage of unlimited purses to enable them to accomplish that very desirable purpose. I am not going to conceal from the House of Commons that, in my humble opinion, a great deal of injury has been done during the past 30 years in this country by our not endeavouring more to maintain the excellence of our breed of horses. Good horses of all kinds— especially horses that would be fitted to carry the Chancellor of the Exchequer and myself—are much more difficult to procure now than they were formerly; but as long as racing is maintained, the fountain of excellence will always remain with us. And why? Because the ambitions of the Turf, and the great prizes that are to be won at it, are sufficient to induce private individuals, like Lord Rosebery, and a great many others to retain in possession of this country the Hermits—the House will forgive me for putting Hermit first—the Stockwells, the Newminsters, the Galopins, the St. Simons, and the Ladases.

§ MR. BUCHANAN (Aberdeenshire, E.)
And the Ormondes.

§ MR. CHAPLIN
Yes; but Ormonde was not quite sound. I was delighted to see Ormonde in consequence removed from this country—I say that without the slightest want of patriotism. But, as I was saying, the encouragements given by the Turf are sufficient to induce private enterprise to maintain in the possession of this country, in spite of all the foreign purses in the world put together, horses of that class. So long as we continue to retain them in England, you can command your breed of horses. Abolish, or discourage, racing and undoubtedly they will go. That is one serious reason, and I will not give another, why I do desire to induce the House of Commons on this occasion to mark their recognition of what was called, and justly called, by my hon. Friend, a great national institution. 433 I trust the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be induced to look favourably on this proposal. Viewing the fact that the present Prime Minister is at this moment owner of the Derby favourite— a horse which, so far as I can see, presents to all outside appearance the greatest certainty in the world of winning—I am entitled to say to Members of the House of Commons, and especially to hon. Gentlemen opposite, what a noble Lord said to me on a former occasion, "England expects the Liberal Party to go down to Epsom to-morrow." I hope they will do so. I hope the Chancellor of the Exchequer will look favourably on this Motion—there is no reason for making this Adjournment a question of confidence in Her Majesty's Government. Political opponent though I am, I hope the Liberal Party will return from Epsom to-morrow conscious of the enormous advantage they have gained because Lord Rosebery has won the Blue Ribbon of the Turf; conscious also of something else on which I am not quite so sure I could heartily congratulate them—that the victory of Ladas has done a real good and very possibly most timely turn to the fortunes of the Party to which they belong.

§ SIR W. HARCOURT
I do not know whether gentlemen who have had to fulfil the arduous and difficult duties which belong to a trustee have ever been solicited by the persons who are the subject of the trust to violate their trust for the advantage of the beneficiaries. It is the duty, and very often the painful duty, of the trustee to say, "Well, gentlemen and ladies, I should be extremely happy to oblige you, but really the fact is that the terms of the trust do not allow me to do so." The Government to-day are in the situation of trustees of the whole time of the House which was granted to them on Thursday last, and the question we have to consider is whether giving up one of these days to attendance at the Derby is strictly in conformity with the terms of that trust. I am sorry to say that we have come to the conclusion that it is not so—that it was not for this purpose that we were entrusted with the whole time of the 434 House; that the House of Commons has other objects to which its time and attention ought to be devoted; and that those who have the disposal of the time of the House have no right to appropriate it to any other purpose than that for which it was given. My right hon. Friend says it is very necessary that the House of Commons should go to the Derby to-morrow in order to keep up the breed of horses in this country. I am quite sure that so long as there are persons like himself, it will not need that special encouragement to maintain in this country a breed of horses of the best description. I can offer him some consolation in that respect. If what he wants is encouragement from the august body of the State, I would remind him that there are three estates of the Realm— the Lords Spiritual, the Lords Temporal, and the Commons of England. He has the undivided encouragement of the two first. They are at his disposal. Enjoying their otium cum dignitate, they can give the countenance of their lawn sleeves to my right hon. Friend on that occasion. I cannot, therefore, think that his argument that horse-breeding will die out in this country in consequence of our attending to public business to-morrow, or that it will seriously injure horse-racing, is well founded. I think that if we were to consent to this Motion we should not be doing that which we are bound to do in reference to the time at our disposal, and therefore I am sorry to say that I cannot accept the proposal.