§ SIR JOHN MACLURE (Lancashire, Stretford)I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether in view of the considerable number of Amendments of 687 which notice is given upon the Address, the difference of importance in regard to them, and the necessary limitation of time that can be devoted to the discussion upon it, and the Amendments, it would be desirable that those which 50 Members have signified they are desirous should be submitted to the House could not have precedence?
§ MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.)In connection with that Question I should like to ask you, Mr. Speaker, to inform the House what is the rule of the order now in force with regard to the precedence of Amendments to the Address.
§ MR. SPEAKERThe only rule is that whoever may catch my eye is called upon; that is the only rule. My practice is to follow mainly the order of the Amendments set down on the Paper. I am not bound to follow that order, but in following it I use my own discretion.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYIn answer to the Question put by my honourable Friend, I presume his object is to confine, as far as possible, the Debates on the Address to important controversial subjects and to general matters having some special reference to the situation at the moment. I am sure that I, at any rate, heartily sympathise with him in that object, and I regret that the House has so far departed from tradition in this matter. But I do not think the particular scheme proposed would have the effect of carrying out his and my object.