HC Deb 09 May 1901 vol 93 cc1258-76

Order for Committee read.


There are three Instructions on going into Committee on this Bill, which is a Bill to prevent the demise of the Crown from having any operation on the tenure of office of servants of the Crown. The first Instruction, standing in the name of the hon. Member for Mid Lanark, proposes that the Committee shall have power to provide that acceptance of office under the Crown shall in no case vacate the seat of a Member of the House of Commons. That has no reference to the tenure of office under the Crown, and is outside the purpose of the Bill. The next Instruction is in the name of the hon. Member for South Donegal, and he proposes— that it be an instruction to the Committee that they have power to introduce a clause providing that the provisions of the Bill do not apply to the holding of any office under the Crown when the holder of such office is chairman or director of a public company. That is clearly not matter for an Instruction, because it merely limits the operation of the Bill. Whether it may be moved as an Amendment in Committee or not is a matter for the chairman when it comes before him. The other Instruction stands in the name of the hon. Member for Thanet, and he proposes that the Committee have— power to make provision that a demise of the Crown, if such occur between the dissolution or expiration of a Parliament, and the day appointed by writ of summons for assembling a new Parliament, shall not render void or in any way affect elections, returns, or other proceedings under writ of summons or other statutory provisions. That is a proposal to determine the difficulty which might arise in the case of the demise of the Crown occurring between the summoning and the assembling of a new Parliament; but that is a matter, again, which has no relation to the effect of a demise upon the tenure of office, which is the subject of the Bill. These Instructions are not in order, and I therefore leave the chair.


Then do I understand that my Instruction cannot be moved at all?


It may be moved, but it may be ruled out of order.

Bill considered in Committee:—

(In the Committee.)

[Mr. J. W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.]

Clause 1:—


The Amendmen standing in the name of the hon. Member for Dundee is out of order, because it conflicts directly with the clause. The proper course for him to take is to reject the clause, and then bring it up in the shape in which he wishes it to be inserted in the Bill.


said he presumed, having been called upon, that his Amendment was quite in order. They were now dealing with the case of those who accepted office at the time of the demise of the Crown. He ventured to submit to the Committee that if there was any class who ought to go to their constituents at the time of accepting office under the Crown, it was the members of the Government. If there was any occasion when it was more necessary than any other to get the verdict of a constituency it was when a Minister accepted office at the demise of the Crown. This was the only way in which constituencies would be afforded an opportunity of expressing their opinion and questioning their representatives in regard to the Civil List. If the clause was not amended, the constituencies would have no opportunity of expressing their views.

Amendment proposed— In page 1, line 5, after the word 'office' to insert the words, 'not being an office of profit.'"—(Mr. Caldwell.)

Question proposed—"That those words be there inserted."


I hope the hon. Member will not think it necessary to press this Amendment.


He will press it.


The Amendment extends far beyond the scope of the remarks made by the hon. Member, because he proposes to omit from the operation of this Bill all paid officers of the Crown. That means an immense majority of officers throughout the Empire and abroad in protectorates belonging to His Majesty. This Amendment would deprive the colonies and protectorates of the convenience of the provision which we propose to make for all offices under the Crown, whether with or without profit. The case which the hon. Member wishes to provide against is not affected by the Amendment, because as the law stands Ministers retain office for six months after the demise of the Crown, and if they had any sinister motive of the kind hinted at they would take care to get the Civil List through before six months had expired. The Civil List is entirely under the control of Parliament, and I listened with a little surprise to the argument of the hon. Gentleman because I remember that the terms of his Instruction, which has just been ruled out of order, were— To provide that acceptance of office under the Crown shall in no case vacate the seat of a Member of the House of Commons.


I think the Attorney General has misunderstood the nature and purpose of the Instruction he has just quoted. The intention of my hon. friend in moving this Instruction was to extend the provision to all cases of acceptance of office, and surely that is a logical position to take up. I made this suggestion on the Second Reading of the Bill, and I believe the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the House cheered it. I will not now go into the question of the Civil List. No doubt the Ministers for the time being would, under the existing law, remain in office long enough to carry the Civil List, but if this Bill passes with such an Amendment as is now proposed the members of the Government responsible for that Civil List would have to face their constituents and get their verdict upon it. I do not think the Attorney General's answer to my hon. friend's speech is at all complete, and unless something better is forthcoming I shall be disposed to vote for my hon. friend's Amendment.


supported the Amendment, and said he hoped it would receive a strong measure of support from the House, as this vicious practice had been gaining ground within the last ten or fifteen years. The practice he alluded to was that of exempting Members of Parliament upon accepting emoluments under the Crown from the necessity of going to their constituents. The old practice was that every Member accepting office under the Crown should face his constituents, and he thought that was a very wise course. Some thirty years ago, according to the law, on the demise of the Crown Parliament itself was dissolved, and every Member had to face his constituents. From some points of view he thought that was a very good principle. Under the present system there was the possibility of a very great evil in the too long duration of Parliament. He thought Parliaments should be quinquennial, and they should not be allowed to go on for six or seven years. In the case of the recent demise of the Crown it took place just after a new Parliament was elected. Supposing the election had been postponed, and the demise of the Crown had taken place when Parliament had been in existence five or six years. Would it not have been held, under such circumstances, to have been a good and wholesome thing that, in spite of the desires of the Ministry, Parliament had been dissolved? In the year 1857 the law was altered and Parliament was allowed to sit on after the demise of the Crown, and so hon. Members were saved the expense and annoyance of facing their constituents. It was a natural thing that Ministers should avail themselves of every opportunity to render the facing of their constituents unnecessary, but he thought it was a very good principle that all Ministers of the Crown should, when they accepted office, be compelled to face their constituents. He, therefore, could not see any force in the argument that Ministers should be relieved of this duty. The Attorney General had pointed out that if the Amendment were accepted it would apply, not only to Ministers in this House, but to the innumerable officials outside the House in all parts of the Empire. But so far as these officials were concerned, it was merely a case of re-appointment, a matter involving no trouble or difficulty whatever. This Bill would never have been heard of if these officials alone had been concerned. The Bill was introduced for the special convenience of His Majesty's present Ministers, and he hoped the Amendment would be pressed to a division.

MR. JAMES LOWTHER (Kent, Thanet)

said he hoped the Government would take care to repeal the absurd law which required Ministers of the Crown on taking office to go back to their constituents for re-election. Serious inconvenience was caused by their being debarred from starting their duties for weeks after their appointment, and the result was that the public service suffered. He trusted that the Government would afford the House a legitimate opportunity of considering that matter. Referring to the position of magistrates, he said that they held an office which was not one of profit, and the question had arisen as to whether they ought to be resworn on account of the demise of the Crown. A magistrate could hold his office and discharge his duties without offending against any legal provision, but an announcement had been made by the Home Secretary that it was better that he should be resworn. Why was it better that he should go through an absolutely superfluous ceremony? He hoped the justices of the peace throughout the country would decline to submit to such a farce.


said he did not quite understand the Attorney General's argument. He had told the House that, if this Amendment came into effect, the result would be that a person who held an office of profit under the Crown would have to be re-elected on the demise of the Crown. Was that so?


said this Amendment would make it necessary that all persons who held offices under the Crown should be reappointed.


said the general view was that, under the present law, a person holding an office of profit at the expiration of six months would have to be reappointed. He thought that was quite clear. Well, but how about His Majesty's Ministers? He was a little desirous of obtaining information as to the reason for changing the law. Was the present law not good enough? He wanted an answer to that. Was it because it was considered to be an inconvenience that persons holding offices of profit should be liable to be reappointed six months after the demise of the Crown? It lay upon the Attorney General to make out a case for doing what he proposed to do. The hon. Member quoted the Act setting forth the present law, and said he could not understand why they required to alter the law. Had anything occurred? He did not know. In the meantime he must say that on its merits this was a good Amendment, but he was open to conversion and conviction by the Attorney General, for, after all, though he could not understand it, a change of the law might be required. Was the Bill intended for the protection of future placemen and pensioners, or for present and past place-men and pensioners? He observed that the Bill was retrospective so far as it could be.


I think the hon. Member is discussing the whole Bill. He must confine himself to the Amendment.


Yes, Sir, I observe the second clause is a separate clause from this. I really want to know what the purpose and effect of this Bill is.


The hon. Member is really now renewing the debate that took place on the Second Reading, and I must invite him to confine himself strictly to the Amendment before the House.


said he had no doubt been a little bit irregular in consequence of not having been present all the time. He wished to know why this Amendment should not be grafted on the change of the law now proposed.


said he could not quite accept the Amendment, which he considered was too wide in its scope. The Bill proposed a change the wisdom of which the Committee would recognise. Most Members would probably allow that it was undesirable that the demise of the Crown should vacate every obscure magistracy, or that every justice of the peace should, six months after the death of the Sovereign, be compelled to go through the form of taking a new oath of allegiance to the new Sovereign; but there were certain offices under the Crown which stood in a very exceptional position. There were offices which on being originally accepted had the condition attached that the person must submit to the judgment of the constituency as to the desirability or wisdom of his having taken office. As the law now stood the present Ministers would, if this Bill did not pass, find themselves ipso facto deprived of their office, and, therefore, before the end of June they would have to seek reappointment by the Sovereign and then re-election by their constituents. This statute would do away with that necessity. He suggested that the hon. Member for Mid. Lanarkshire should narrow the scope of his Amendment by adopting these words, "except offices held by Members of the House of Commons." If the hon. Member would accept that suggestion he should be inclined to vote in favour of the Amendment.


accepted the suggestion of his hon. and learned friend.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment proposed— In page 1, line 5, after the word 'Crown,' to insert the words 'except offices held by Members of the House of Commons.'"—(Mr. Caldwell.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."


said that these matters must be dealt with on some principle, and the principle of the Bill was that the demise of the Crown should not vacate offices. There was no reason now for Ministers having to surrender office. It was very extraordinary that the new Amendment was suggested by an hon. Gentleman who had actually given notice of an Instruction. The hon. Member did not like to be reminded of that. He seemed to regard it as a sort of youthful indiscretion. When the hon. Member put down that Instruction his view must have been decidedly opposed to that contained in the new Amendment. He (Sir Robert Finlay) hoped the Committee would take the view that the Amendment was capricious.


expressed the hope that the House would not reject the Amendment. The clause as it stood was insidious. It was to shield the Members of the Treasury Bench from facing their constituents. On the 23rd January, Ministers all re-appointed themselves, and he would have something more to say about that by and by. The Attorney General had talked about constitutional principles, but he was the prime violator of the Constitution. The Bill was wholly unnecessary, except to provide immunity to Ministers in their own interest, and yet Ministers dared to talk of constitutionalism! He would uphold through thick and thin that the Attorney General did not know the law.

MR. MOORE (Antrim, N.)

said he had listened with much interest to the speech of the hon. and learned Member for South Leeds, who had appealed on a purely legal point to the 162 legal Members in the House. That hon. and learned Member insisted on enforcing the old principle that when a Member of Parliament took a new office he was obliged to face his constituents in a new election. He would like to point out that that question had been raised on the creation of the office of Vice-President of the Agricultural and Technical Education Department in Ireland. It went to the Committee upstairs, where the Attorney General expressed to the Committee the view that the holders of offices created during this century should not be exposed to what he might call the risks of re-election. He submitted that the whole tendency of modern legislation from 1867 downwards was that it was not necessary to expose a man who accepted office to face his constituents on that account.


maintained that if the law was going to be altered it should apply to every appointment under the Crown. The Bill ought to have been more comprehensive, and he objected to the special application which the Bill would have in, the case of Ministers who held office at the demise of the Crown. There was no comparison between the dignity of Ministers of the Crown and other servants of the Crown. The reason was that Ministers stood in a very different position from other servants of the Crown, especially in relation to the Civil List and other matters. If there was to be an alteration of the law it ought not to be limited to Ministers of the Crown.


said that the debate was of a very singular character. The hon. Gentleman had alluded to a Member of the House who had been appointed to a new office in spite of the protest of not only the Irish party, but of the whole of the Liberal party in the House. They were, however, over-borne, and Mr. Plunkett was placed at the head of the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction in Ireland. But what was the result? That gentleman had not been able to get a seat in the whole of Ireland, and therefore his case was a singularly unfortunate illustration to be brought forward by the hon. Gentleman. In fact, it confirmed his proposition that when a man became the paid servant of the Government he ought to seek re-election, because it was a constitutional right of a constituency to choose whether they would be represented by an independent, unpaid Member or not. The Attorney General talked of the ancient rule being intended to apply to Ministers when they were personal servants of the Crown; but everyone knew that when a Minister became a salaried servant of the Crown his whole character was altered, and it was the right of his constituents to say whether they preferred to be represented by such a member of the Ministry or not. There could not be a greater proof of the evil of this new and vicious principle, which was gradually being introduced into the practice of the House of Commons for the convenience of hon. Gentlemen who meant to take office, than the case of the right hon. Gentleman who lately represented South Dublin. A man who held office under the Crown owed to the Crown undivided allegiance; but a man who was a Member of the House and also a servant of the Crown had a double allegiance as a representative of the Crown and as a representative of his constituency, and his constituency ought to be allowed to say at the earliest moment whether they preferred him in that capacity. If it were desirable to alter the law as proposed by this Bill, it should not be done for a particular and specific occasion, for the purpose of relieving His Majesty's Ministers from the necessity of facing their constituents. This question ought to be debated and dealt with on its merits, and not on the convenience of His Majesty's Ministers. The hon. Gentleman the Attorney General declared that it was manifestly absurd to keep up the old system; in other words, the constitutional practice of 200 years was to be broken to get Ministers out of a difficulty. That he held was absurd. Those who had been in the House for some time knew that there was considerable public inconvenience when important Ministers had to be absent from the House for some weeks between their appointment and re-election, but that public inconvenience would not have been borne for 200 or 300 years unless an important constitutional principle had been involved.

*MR. HEMPHILL (Tyrone, N.)

said that if this Bill meant anything, it meant a Bill of indemnity to the hon. and right hon. Gentlemen who sat on the Treasury Bench who had been re-appointed by the King and had not sought re-election. It was perfectly clear that all offices held under the Crown, determined, by common law, at the demise of the Crown; and the Statute of Queen Anne, to which reference had been made, only permitted officers under the Crown to continue in office until six months after the demise of the Sovereign. The Act of 1867 only provided that when a Minister was changed from one office to another he did not necessarily vacate his seat. That did not meet the case of a Minister being re-appointed to the same office as he had held under the deceased Queen. The hon. Member for North Antrim referred to the case of Mr. Plunkett; but there was a clause in the Act creating the office of Vice-President of the Agricultural and the Technical Educational Department, stating that the appointment of that right hon. Gentleman should not affect his seat. He thought it would be a very great mistake, by a side wind, so to speak, to alter the constitutional law of the country in this matter, a law which had existed for centuries. Otherwise, when Members got into Parliament, and were tempted with the offer of office, they might accept that office, although they had secured their seat on the faith that they were perfectly independent, or held political opinions quite different from those of the Ministry in power.

MR. TULLY (Leitrim, S.)

said he thought that the Amendment was a very important one. The real question was whether Ministers on appointment should go before their constituencies for re-election. Many in Ireland were anxious that Ministers should be sent to their constituencies. They knew that after the vote of the Attorney General for Ireland in regard to the land purchase question—


The hon. Gentleman is taking rather too great a latitude in discussing the resolution before the Committee.


said that the Attorney General for Ireland ought to have gone

before his constituents and obtained their verdict on his appointment. The Amendment introduced the vicious principle of co-option in the House, enabling the Tory party to co-opt their Members to office. He knew that hon. and right hon. Gentlemen on the other side would go into the lobby and vote for this Bill for their own convenience. He would support the hon. Member for Mid Lanark in his Amendment, and he hoped that the hon. Gentleman would go to a division. A most important constitutional question had been raised by the hon. Member.


I must remind the hon. Member of the Standing Order against repetition.


said he would strive to submit to the ruling of the Chairman; but the hon. Member for North Antrim had been very persistent in interrupting him that night. Mr. Plunkett, when appointed to his present position in the Department of Agriculture, had a special clause in the Act of Parliament creating the office stating that he should not go before his constituents, although he had accepted office. But what was the result? When Mr. Plunkett went to his constituents in the ordinary course at the last General Election he was rejected.


rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."

Question put, "That the Question be now put."

The Committee divided:—Ayes, 216; Noes, 121. (Division List No. 178.)

Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F. Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin Channing, Francis Allston
Agg-Gardner, James Tynte Beach, RtHn.SirM.H.(Bristol) Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry
Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel Beckett, Ernest William Chapman, Edward
Anson, Sir William Reynell Bentinck, Lord Henry C. Charrington, Spencer
Archdale, Edward Mervyn Blundell, Colonel Henry Churchill, Winston Spencer
Arnold-Forster, Hugh O. Brassey, Albert Clare, Octavius Leigh
Ashmead-Bartlett, Sir Ellis Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.
Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John Brookfield, Colonel Montagu Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse
Austin, Sir John Brymer, William Ernest Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready
Bailey, James (Walworth) Bullard, Sir Harry Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole
Bain, Colonel James Robert Butcher, John George Compton, Lord Alwyne
Baird, John George Alexander Carlile, William Walter Corbett, T. L. (Down, North
Balcarres, Lord Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. Cranborne, Viscount
Baldwin, Alfred Cautley, Henry Strother Cubitt, Hon. Henry
Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs.) Dalrymple, Sir Charles
Balfour, Rt. Hn Gerald W (Leeds Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh. Denny, Col.
Balfour, Maj K R (Christchurch Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) Dickson, Charles Scott
Banbury, Frederick George Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich) Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.
Bartley, George C. T. Chamberlain, J Austen (Worc'r Dimsdale, Sir Joseph Cockfield
Dorington, Sir John Edward Law, Andrew Bonar Rankin, Sir James
Doxford, Sir William Theodore Lawrence, Joseph (Monmouth) Rasch, Major Frederic Carne
Duke, Henry Edward Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) Ratcliffe, R. F.
Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin Lawson, John Grant Reid, James (Greenock)
Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir Wm. Hart Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage Ridley, S. F. (Bethnal Green)
Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie Ritchie, Rt. Hon. Charles T.
Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S Robertson, Herbert (Hackney
Faber, George Denison Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R. Rolleston, Sir John F. L.
Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw. Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine Rothschild, Hon. Lionel W.
Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r Long, Rt. Hn Walter (Bristol, S. Rutherford, John
Finch, George H. Lowe, Francis William Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-
Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne Loyd, Archie Kirkman Sadler, Col. Samuel Alex.
Fisher, William Hayes Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft) Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln
Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A. Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth Seton-Karr, Henry
Fletcher, Sir Henry Macdona, John Cumming Sharpe, William Edward T.
Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk. Maconochie, A. W. Simeon, Sir Barrington
Gordon, Hn. J E. (Elgin & Nairn) M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool) Sinclair, Louis (Romford)
Gordon, Maj. E.- (T'w'rH'mlets M'Calmont, Col. J. (Antrim, E.) Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)
Gore, Hon. F. S. Ormsby- M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire) Smith, H. C. (N'rth'mb Tyneside
Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon Majendie, James A. H. Smith, James Parker (Lanarks
Goulding, Edward Alfred Manners, Lord Cecil Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand
Green, Walford D. (Wednesb'ry Martin, Richard Biddulph Spear, John Ward
Greene, Sir E W (B'ry S Edm'nd's Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriessh. Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)
Greene, W. Raymond- (Cambs.) Melville, Beresford Valentine Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)
Grenfell, William Henry Milward, Colonel Victor Stewart, Sir M. J. McTaggart
Gretton, John Molesworth, Sir Lewis Stroyan, John
Groves, James Grimble Montagu, G. (Huntingdon) Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley
Guthrie, Walter Murray Moore, William (Antrim, N.) Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier
Ham, Edward Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow) Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)
Halsey, Thomas Frederick Morrell, George Herbert Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Oxf'd Uni.
Hambro, Charles Eric Morris, Hon. Martin Henry F. Thornton, Percy M.
Hamilton, Rt Hn Lrd G. (Midd'x Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford Tollemache, Henry James
Hanbury, Rt. Hn. Robert W. Mount, William Arthur Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray
Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'd Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C. Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward
Harris, Frederick Leverton Murray, Rt Hn A Graham (Bute Valentia, Viscount
Haslam, Sir Alfred S. Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)
Hay, Hon. Claude George Newdigate, Francis Alexander Walker, Col. William Hall
Heath, James (Staffords, N.W. Nicholson, William Graham Warde, Colonel C. E.
Heaton, John Henniker Nicol, Donald Ninian Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney
Helder, Augustus O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens Welby, Sir Chas. G. E. (Notts
Henderson, Alexander Parker, Gilbert Whitmore, Charles Algernon
Hermon-Hodge, Robt. Trotter Parkes, Ebenezer Willox, Sir John Archibald
Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E. Peel, Hn. W. Robert Wellesley Wilson, A. S. (York, E.R.)
Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry Pemberton, John S. G. Wilson, John (Glasgow)
Howard, John (Kent, F'versh'm Percy, Earl Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks.
Hozier, Hon. Jas. Henry Cecil Pierpoint, Robert Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E.R. (Bath
Hudson, George Bickersteth Pilkington, Lt.-Col. Richard Wylie, Alexander
Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick Platt-Higgins, Frederick Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George
Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton Plummer, Walter R. Young, Commander (Berks, E.)
Johnston, William (Belfast) Powell, Sir Francis Sharp Younger, William
Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex) Pretyman, Ernest George
Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward TELLERS FOR THE AYES—
Keswick, William Purvis, Robert Sir William Walrond and.
King, Sir Henry Seymour Randles, John S. Mr. Anstruther.
Abraham, William (Cork, N.E. Crean, Eugene Goddard, Daniel Ford
Allen, Charles P (Glouc., Stroud Cremer, William Randal Griffith, Ellis J.
Ambrose, Robert Cullinan, J. Hammond, John
Barry, E. (Cork, S.) Delany, William Harmsworth, R. Leicester
Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire) Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh. Hayden, John Patrick
Bell, Richard Dillon, John Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-
Black, Alexander William Doogan, P. C. Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir A. D.
Boland, John Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) Helme, Norval Watson
Boyle, James Duffy, William J. Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Chas. H.
Brigg, John Duncan, J. Hastings Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.)
Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson Edwards, Frank Holland, William Henry
Bryce, Rt. Hon. James Ffrench, Peter Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)
Burke, E. Haviland- Flavin, Michael Joseph Jameson, Major J. Eustace
Caldwell, James Flynn, James Christopher Jones, David Brynmor (Sw'ns'a
Campbell, John (Armagh, S.) Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.) Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)
Colville, John Fuller, J. M. F. Joyce, Michael
Condon, Thomas Joseph Gilhooly, James Labouchere, Henry
Craig, Robert Hunter Lambert, George
Layland-Barratt, Francis O'Doherty, William Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)
Leamy, Edmund O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.) Shipman, Dr. John G.
Leigh, Sir Joseph O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) Stevenson, Francis S.
Lowther, Rt.Hn.James (Kent) O'Dowd, John Strachey, Edward
Lundon, W. O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) Sullivan, Donal
MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A. O'Malley, William Taylor, Theodore Cooke
MacNeill, John Gordon Swift O'Mara, James Thomas, David A. (Merthyr)
M'Arthur William (Cornwall) O'Shaughnessy, P. J. Trevelyan, Charles Philips
M'Dermott, Patrick Partington, Oswald Tully, Jasper
M'Fadden, Edward Pearson, Sir Weetman D. Ure, Alexander
M'Laren, Charles Benjamin Pirie, Duncan V. Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.
Mooney, John J. Power, Patrick Joseph Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.
Morgan, J. L. (Carmarthen) Price, Robert John White, George (Norfolk)
Morley, Charles (Breconshire) Priestley, Arthur White, Luke (York, E. R.)
Morton, Edw. J.C. (Devonport) Rea, Russell White, Patrick (Meath, N.)
Moulton, John Fletcher Redmond, John E. (Waterford Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)
Murphy, J. Redmond, William (Clare) Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)
Nannetti, Joseph P. Rickett, J. Compton Wilson, Fred W. (Norfolk, Mid.
Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) Rigg, Richard Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.
Norman, Henry Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion) Woodhouse, Sir J T (Huddersf'd
Nussey, Thomas Willans Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)
O'Brien, Kendal (Tipper'ry Mid Roche, John TELLERS FOR THE NOES—
O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.) Roe, Sir Thomas Captain Donelan and Mr.
O'Connor, Jas. (Wicklow, W.) Shaw, Chas. Edw. (Stafford) Patrick O'Brien.

Question put accordingly, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided:—Ayes, 108; Noes, 225. (Division List No. 179.)

Abraham, Wm. (Cork, N.E.) Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D. O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)
Ambrose, Robert Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H. O'Malley, William
Barry, E. (Cork, S.) Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.) O'Mara, James
Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire) Holland, William Henry O'Shaughnessy, P. J.
Bell, Richard Hope, John Deans (Fife, West) Pearson, Sir Weetman D.
Black, Alexander William Jameson, Maj. J. Eustace Pirie, Duncan V.
Boland, John Jones, David Brynmor (Swans'a Power, Patrick Joseph
Boyle, James Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.) Price, Robert John
Brigg, John Joyce, Michael Priestley, Arthur
Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson Lambert, George Rea, Russell
Burke, E. Haviland- Layland-Barratt, Francis Redmond, John E. (Waterford)
Campbell, John (Armagh, S.) Leamy, Edmund Redmond, William (Clare)
Channing, Francis Allston Leigh, Sir Joseph Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)
Colville, John Lundon, W. Roberts, John H. (Denbighsh.)
Condon, Thomas Joseph MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A. Roche, John
Craig, Robert Hunter MacNeill, John Gordon Swift Roe, Sir Thomas
Crean, Eugene M'Dermott, Patrick Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)
Cremer, William Randal M'Fadden, Edward Stevenson, Francis S.
Cullinan, J. M'Laren, Charles Benjamin Strachey, Edward
Delany, William Mooney, John J. Sullivan, Donal
Dillon, John Morley, Charles (Breconshire) Taylor, Theodore Cooke
Donelan, Captain A. Morton, Edw. J. C. (Devonport) Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr
Doogan, P. C. Moulton, John Fletcher Tully, Jasper
Duffy, William J. Murphy, J. Ure, Alexander
Duncan, J. Hastings Nannetti, Joseph P. Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S
Edwards, Frank Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.
Ffrench, Peter Norman, Henry White, George (Norfolk)
Flavin, Michael Joseph Norton, Capt. Cecil William White, Luke (York, E. R.)
Flynn, James Christopher Nussey, Thomas Willans White, Patrick (Meath, North)
Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.) O'Brien, Kendal (Tipper'y, Mid Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)
Fuller, J. M. F. O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)
Gilhooly, James O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.) Wilson, Fred. W (Norfolk, Mid.
Goddard, Daniel Ford O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W. Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)
Griffith, Ellis J. O'Doherty, William Woodhouse, Sir J T (Huddersf'd
Hammond, John O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.) TELLERS FOR THE AYES—
Hayden, John Patrick O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) Mr. Caldwell and Mr.
Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale- O'Dowd, John Lloyd Morgan.
Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F. Ashmead-Bartlett, Sir Ellis Baldwin, Alfred
Agg-Gardner, James Tynte Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r)
Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel Austin, Sir John Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds.
Allen, Chas. P. (Glouc., Stroud Bailey, James (Walworth) Balfour, Maj K. R. (Christch'ch.
Anson, Sir Wm. Reynell Bain, Colonel James Robert Banbury, Frederick George
Archdale, Edward Mervyn Baird, John George Alexander Bartley, George C. T.
Arnold-Forster, Hugh O. Balcarres, Lord Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin
Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm. Percy, Earl
Beckett, Ernest William Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'd Pierpoint Robert
Bentinck, Lord Henry C. Harris, Frederick Leverton Pilkington, Lt.-Col. Richard
Blundell, Colonel Henry Haslam, Sir Alfred S. Platt-Higgins, Frederick
Brassey, Albeit Hay, Hon. Claude George Plummer, Walter R.
Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John Heath, James (Staffords., N. W. Powell, Sir Francis Sharp
Brookfield, Colonel Montagu Heaton, John Henniker Pretyman, Ernest George
Brymer, William Ernest Helder, Augustus Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward
Bullard, Sir Harry Helme, Norval Watson Purvis, Robert
Butcher, John George Henderson, Alexander Randles, John S.
Carlile, William Walter Hermon-Hodge, Robert Trotter Rankin, Sir James
Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E. Rasch, Maj. Frederic Carne
Cautley, Henry Strother Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry Ratcliffe, R. F.
Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs.) Howard, John (Kent, Faversh. Reid, James (Greenock)
Cavendish, V C. W. (Derbyshire Hozier, Hn. Jas. Henry Cecil Renwick, George
Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) Hudson, George Bickersteth Rickett, J. Compton
Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich) Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green
Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc' Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton Rigg, Richard
Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry Johnston, William (Belfast) Ritchie, Rt. Hon. Charles T.
Chapman, Edward Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex) Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)
Charrington, Spencer Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H. Rolleston, Sir John F. L.
Churchill, Winston Spencer Keswick, William Rothschild, Hn. Lionel Walter
Clare, Octavius Leigh King, Sir Henry Seymour Rutherford, John
Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. Law, Andrew Bonar Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-
Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse Lawrence, Joseph (Monmouth Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander
Colomb, Sir John Charles R. Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)
Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole Lawson, John Grant Seton-Karr, Henry
Compton, Lord Alwyne Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage Sharpe, Wm. Edw. T.
Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)
Cranborne, Viscount Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S Shipman, Dr. John G.
Cubitt, Hon. Henry Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R. Simeon, Sir Barrington
Dalrymple, Sir Charles Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine Sinclair, Louis (Romford)
Denny, Colonel Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Bristol, S. Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, E.
Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.) Lowe, Francis William Smith, H. C (Northmb Tyneside
Dickson, Charles Scott Lowther, Rt. Hon. James (Kent Smith, Jas. Parker (Lanarks.)
Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P. Loyd, Archie Kirkman Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)
Dimsdale, Sir Joseph Cockfield Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft Spear, John Ward
Dorington, Sir John Edward Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsm'th Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk
Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) Macdona, John Gumming Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)
Doxford, Sir William Theodore Maconochie, A. W. Stewart. Sir Mark J. M'Taggart.
Duke, Henry Edward M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool) Stroyan, John
Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin M'Calmont, Col. J. (Antrim, E. Strutt, Hon. Chas. Hedley
Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir Win. H. M'Killop, Jas. (Stirlingshire) Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier
Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton Majendie, James A. H. Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)
Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas Manners, Lord Cecil Talbot, Rt Hn. J. G. (Oxf'd Univ.
Faber, George Denison Martin, Richard Biddulph Thornton, Percy M.
Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw. Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dnmfriessh. Tollemache, Henry James
Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Manc. Melville, Beresford Valentine Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray
Finch, George H. Milward, Colonel Victor Trevelyan, Charles Philips
Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne Molesworth, Sir Lewis Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward
Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon Montagu, G. (Huntingdon) Valentia, Viscount
Fletcher, Sir Henry Moore, William (Antrim N.) Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter
Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick Morgan, David J (Walthamst'w Walker, Col. William Hall
Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn Morrell, George Herbert Warde, Colonel C. E.
Gordon, Maj Evans- (T'rH'ml'ts Morris, Hon. Martin Henry F. Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney
Gore, Hon. F. S. Ormshy- Morton, Arthur H A. (Deptford Welby, Sir Charles G. E (Notts.)
Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon Mount, William Arthur Whitmore, Charles Algernon
Goulding, Edward Alfred Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C. Willox, Sir John Archibald
Green, Walford D (Wednesbury Murray, Rt Hn A Graham (Bute Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E.R.)
Greene, Sir E W (B'ry S Edm'nds Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) Wilson, John (Glasgow)
Greene, W. Raymond- (Cambs.) Newdigate, Francis Alexander Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (York.)
Grenfell, William Henry Nicholson, William Graham Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath
Gretton, John Nicol, Donald Ninian Wylie, Alexander
Groves, James Grimble O'Neill, Hon. Rbt. Torrens Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George
Guthrie, Walter Murray Parker, Gilbert Young, Commander (Berks, E.)
Hain, Edward Parkes, Ebenezer Younger, William
Halsey, Thomas Frederick Partington, Oswald TELLERS FOR THE NOES—
Hambro, Charles Eric Peel, Hn. Wm Robert Wellesley Sir William Walrond and
Hamilton, Rt Hn. Ld. G (Midd'x Pemberton, John S. G. Mr. Hayes Fisher.

It being after Midnight, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.

Committee report Progress; to sit again to-morrow.

Adjourned at half-past Twelve of the clock.