OFFICE OF SPEAKER.

HC Deb 10 February 1902 vol 102 cc921-72

Standing Order No. 83 [20th July, 1855] read, as followeth†:—

That whenever the House shall be informed by the Clerk at the Table of the unavoidable absence of Mr. Speaker, the Chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means do perform the duties and exercise the authority of Speaker in relation to all proceedings of this House, as Deputy Speaker, until the next meeting of the House, and so on from day to day, on the like information being given to the House, until the House shall otherwise order: Provided that if the House shall adjourn for more than Twenty-four hours the Deputy Speaker shall continue to perform the duties and exercise the authority of Speaker for Twenty-four hours only after such adjournment:—

Amendment proposed at the end of the Standing Order to add the words— At the commencement of every Parliament or from time to time, as necessity may arise, the House may appoint a Deputy Chairman, who shall, whenever the House is informed of the unavoidable absence of the Chairman of Ways and Means, be entitled to exercise all the powers vested in the Chairman of Ways and Means, including his powers as Deputy Speaker":—(Mr. A. J. Balfour.)

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

(7.38.) SIR SAMUEL HOARE (Norwich)

said that of all the Amendments which the Leader of the House had put before them there was none of greater importance than the one which they were now considering. While it might be right and very desirable to alter their Rules of Procedure in order to facilitate business, it was of still greater importance that they should make provision that under any con- †Throughout these debates, the Standing Order proposed to be amended, or the proposed new Standing Order, will be first stated at length; at the close of the discussion, the Order, as it eventually emerges, will be printed in italic type. tingency the work of the House should not be suspended owing to the illness either of Mr. Speaker or the Chairman of Ways and Means. It was somewhat interesting to note that this Motion should be made within a week of the House having experienced circumstances which might have led to considerable inconvenience and even to the suspension of the sittings of the House. Only last week, to the great regret of the House, Mr. Speaker, through indisposition, was unable to be in his place, and his position was occupied by the Chairman of Ways and Means. Within twenty-four hours of this incident the Chairman of Ways and Means was taken ill, and he felt sure that he was expressing the general feeling of the House when he expressed the hope that the right hon. Gentleman would soon be restored to health. Under those circumstances Mr. Speaker took the Chair at a time when he ought to have taken one or two day's rest, instead of taking the Chair as he did, and the House greatly appreciated what Mr. Speaker did. Therefore, he felt that they ought not to wait till an emergency came, and they should be prepared with an assistant Deputy Chairman able to carry out the duties either in Committee or in the unfortunate absence of Mr. Speaker.

It was unnecessary for him to labour the importance of having some hon. Member who was prepared to undertake those duties. He quite realised that every session Mr. Speaker nominated five Gentlemen to act as Deputy Chairman, and he would be the first to acknowledge that those hon. Gentlemen when called upon from time to time had fulfilled their duties most ably. He hoped, therefore, that the plan which had hitherto existed of appointing five Deputy Chairmen would always be continued. They had, however, to remember that it was not merely within this House that difficulties arose through the absence of Mr. Speaker or the Chairman of Ways and Means. He thought hon. Members scarcely realised the amount of work which was placed upon the Chairman of Ways and Means, and it was especially with reference to that work that he wished to impress upon the Leader of the House the importance of facing the upstairs work as well as the work in the House by the appointment of a permanent Deputy Chairman. Anyone who looked at the Standing Orders would at once see the immense amount of duties which were placed upon the Chairman of Ways and Means. There was a great deal of work to be done outside the House, and as long ago as the year 1888 it was clearly put forward that the Chairman of Ways and Means had really more work to do than it was possible for him to undertake. Other evidence which had been taken upon this subject pointed in the same direction. He thought it was only right that the House should realise the great amount of work that had been placed upon the Chairman of Ways and Means, in order that they might express their appreciation of the manner in which that work had been done in the past as well as by the present holder of the office. The Chairman of Ways and Means had a great many other duties which involved his attendance in the House both morning and afternoon at different hours. He had often to see the promoters of Bills and consider with them certain points. He had also to see the opponents of Bills and had to confer with the Speaker's Counsel. When it was remembered that this session there were 187 private Bills down for consideration, it would be understood that the Chairman had a great deal of work to do. He wished for a moment to consider what would be the position of affairs with reference to private Bills if the Chairman of Ways and Means was laid up by illness for any considerable time. Hon. Members reading the Standing Orders would see that according to the procedure laid down notice had to be given to the Chairman of Ways and Means two or three days before the various stages of a Bill could be taken. The Amendments had to be put down, and the Chairman of Ways and Means was responsible to see that they were in order. He had himself known cases where the parties interested in a Bill had been prevented from seeing the Chairman of Ways and Means on account of his illness, and the result was that there was difficulty. This would be solved if only there was in future a Deputy Chairman who could undertake a great portion of the work now placed upon the Chairman. The Chairman of Ways and Means was sometimes up to a very late hour indeed, and next morning he was expected to be present to assist various people with respect to their private Bills. The hon. Member believed it had always been the custom of the Chairman of Ways and Means and those with whom he acted, as well as Committees who were responsible for investigating private Bills to try, as far as possible, when they believed a Bill was good, to see that that Bill should be passed through. This often meant a good deal of compromise on the part of those interested in the Bill, but he thought it was right, after the parties had gone to great expense, that if arrangements could be made, either in the Committee-room or on the advice of the Chairman, or Mr. Speaker's Counsel, they should report to the House that the preamble was proved. That was what the House desired should be done. Some hon. Members might suppose that the Chairman of Committee on unopposed Bills might mean little or nothing. But it should be remembered that the Chairman of Ways and Means had to read these Bills and, when he thought the circumstances necessitated it, to make an unopposed an opposed Bill. Sometimes they had a Bill opposed in Committee, and then it went back to the Committee as an unopposed Bill. He thought from his own experience that a great deal of care was required with Bills which went through that course. He expressed the hope that the Leader of the House would be able to assure them that this officer of the House was not to be appointed as emergency arose, but that he was to be appointed as regularly as the Chairman of Ways and Means—that he should be, practically, always in the House, watching the business and ready to help. He had put down an Amendment to insert after "Deputy Chairman" the words "At a salary of £1,500 per annum," but he understood that would be out of order. He trusted, however, that if they appointed an officer able to cope with the business he would receive an adequate salary for his services. He did not think they were justified in asking any Member to give up the time that was necessary for the work, which would be heavy, unless they properly remunerated him for his services. He believed it would be to the advantage of private Bill business if they had a Deputy Chairman thoroughly acquainted with the various stages and with the circumstances of Bills. He was one of those who were anxious to see business go through as smoothly as possible. Splendidly as the Chairman of Ways and Means had done his work in the past, it was not fair that they should impose more on him than he could do. Nor was it fair that either Mr. Speaker or the Chairman of Ways and Means should be obliged when indisposed to come to undertake their duties in order to prevent the business of the country from coming to a standstill. He expressed the hope that his right hon. friend would consider these views in the spirit in which they were offered, and, if possible, give effect to them in the way he thought best.

*(7.55.) MR. MELLOR (Yorkshire, W.R., Sowerby)

said the proposed Rule as it appeared on the Paper would not carry out the object intended. If they were going to make an alteration in the present practice of the House there ought to be an officer of the House appointed and not merely a casual Member to act in an emergency for one, two, or three days in the course of the year. They should have an officer who would learn the work of the House, and who would be competent to take the Chair either for the Speaker or the Chairman in the case of unavoidable absence. With regard to private business, he could only say that the Chairman of Ways and Means had to do a great deal more work than any Member who had not investigated the matter could possibly imagine. He had to sit as Chairman in the Court of Referees, and that was a Court of considerable importance to the House. It was one of the most important Standing Committees, its object being to determine all questions of locus standi. The Chairman of Ways and Means got a certain amount of assistance, but at times it was necessary for him to take the Chair there. He had to take the Chair at the meetings of the Unopposed Bills Committee. That sounded unimportant, but it was really a very important matter. That Committee dealt with all Bills in respect of which petitions had been withdrawn. The Chairman of Ways and Means had to sit with Mr. Speaker's Counsel, and probably another Member, and go into all the circumstances connected with the Bill. The Home Office and the Local Government Board and other Departments of the Government had to make reports to the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, and his first duty was to see that the reports were complied with. People often came to the Chairman of Ways and Means to ask questions and to ascertain whether he could help them to settle matters of opposition, and to see whether he could arrange for the future progress of Bills. Having seen these people, he came into the House at 3 o'clock, and he was expected to give to the House the knowledge he had gained of the various Bills which had been brought before him. It was a much greater labour than appeared. If the 12 o'clock Rule was unhappily suspended, he had to go on sitting into the night. The hon. Member remembered, when the Home Rule Bill was before the House, Amendments were brought to the Chairman in bundles, and it was his duty to make up his mind whether they were in order or not, and then to see that those which were in order were properly dealt with. It took a great deal of time, and caused a great deal of anxiety to the Chairman, because before sitting on such a Bill he had to prepare himself by looking at the Amendments on the Paper, and looking at the authorities and rulings of former Speakers and Chairmen to see whether the Amendments were in order or not. In addition to that, if the Speaker was ill, then the Chairman of Ways and Means, as Deputy Speaker had to take the Chair, and he would have the same difficulties to encounter as the Speaker. The First Lord of the Treasury was, he understood, acting in this matter as Leader of the House, and was willing to listen not only to the discussion of these rules, but to make Amendments on them if these were reasonable. He trusted sincerely that the First Lord would accept the suggestion, and for this reason; that if any ordinary Member of the House was put into the Speaker's Chair temporarily, the effect would be that he would have the powers of the Speaker, but not the Speaker's authority. There was a great difference in that respect. The position of the Speaker was great, and one of very high authority, and thus it was that the Speaker was able to control the deliberation of the House, and to keep order under all circumstances. He hoped that the Government would listen to this suggestion, and that they would appoint a permanent officer of the House, who would be able to take his fair share of the duties of Chairman of Ways and Means in regard to private business.

(8.4.) MR. A. J. BALFOUR

There is no Amendment before the House, but a suggestion. Both my hon. friend who started this debate and the right hon. Gentleman opposite spoke with authority as to the labours, responsibility, and duties of the Chairman of Committees. I certainly have no knowledge of my own respecting the details of the work that responsible officer has to deal with, nor can I compare them with others, but I fully accept their general statements. The proposal that we should have a highly-paid Assistant Chairman of Committees is, I think, well worthy of consideration, but it is outside the scope of the actual proposal of the Government. There is a good deal to be thought of before we make a new paid officer in this House, and I should certainly not like to make the proposal on my own volition until I knew more about it. It is sufficient, I think, that in this rule we deal with a specific danger which this House has run, I was going to say for centuries, but which, so far as I know, has never produced any great public catastrophe, though it might have brought us to the verge of a great Parliamentary difficulty. The Rule, as it stands, provides a way out of that difficulty, and I would venture to suggest that the House would be well advised in taking the rule as the Government has proposed it. It would not be a barrier to the proposals of my hon. friend and the right hon. Gentleman, which might well come under the consideration of any Committee appointed to consider Private Bill Legislation. I understand that there is no opposition to the rule; and that the actual suggestion we have made need raise no great controversy.

Sir. H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN

The right hon. Gentleman was never more mistaken.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

Had I known the right hon. Gentleman had any objection to the rule—he might have communicated with me.

* Sir CHARLES DILKE (Gloucestershire, Forest of Dean)

said that many of them thought, rightly or wrongly, that the right hon. Gentleman was going to accept the proposal that a salary should be paid to the new Deputy Chairman, because that was the way to maintain the control of Parliament. That was the reason why the right hon. Gentleman had heard nothing in opposition to the Rule. Many of them thought there was enormous danger in trusting the next rule to a casual Chairman over whom they had no control, and he would offer the fiercest opposition to this Rule unless a promise of payment was made.

*(8.10.) Sir J. FERGUSSON (Manchester, N.E.)

said he was probably the only Member of the House who remembered the first time the Chairman of Ways and Means took the Chair in the room of the Speaker. That was in 1855, owing to the indisposition of the Speaker, and in pursuance of a Standing Order passed after the Report of the Select Committee in 1853. His right hon. friend had said that they had got on very well for centuries without the necessity of an additional officer, and that brought to his mind how it became necessary that the Chairman of Committees should be made Deputy Speaker. In previous times, when, unhappily for any reason, the Speaker was unable to take the Chair, business was not so pressing, and, by arrangement, a House was not made. It so happened that within a month of the occasion to which he referred, the Speaker, having met with a slight accident, was prevented from performing his duty, and for two nights running a House was not made. It was then that the new rule was taken advantage of. The fact was that the business of the House was now so much heavier, and the time of Parliament was so much more valuable, that it would be impossible to get through the session if, from time to time, they had to pass over a sitting. It was quite evident that anyone entrusted with the authority of the Speaker, or the Chairman of ways and Means, should be a man in whom the House had complete confidence; and he was quite sure that there were many Members of the House in whom the necessary qualities might be found. Members from all parts of the House had taken the Chair occasionally, though without full powers, and they had shewn their ability to conduct the business of the House. He had only risen to point out that they could not afford, in these times, when the business of the House had so much increased, to run the risk of not having some one to take the Chair upon such an emergency as a few days ago might easily have taken taken place, and in the interests of the House the proposal of the Government was, he considered, highly expedient. (8.15.)

(8.45.) MR. LODER (Brighton)

said that until he heard the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Forest of Dean, he was under the impression that, whatever might be said about the proposed new rules as a whole, the one dealing with the appointment of a Deputy Chairman would, at any rate, be received with a chorus of approval and satisfaction by the House. By the Amendment he was about to move he did not intend in any way to delay the progress of the new rule, but simply to elicit from the Government the exact intention of the proposal. The House was under the impression that a rule was to be established that in future a Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means should be appointed to take the place of the Chairman or the Speaker when one or both were indisposed. But the wording of the proposed addition to the Standing Order left it optional for the Government of the day to make such an appointment or not, as they thought fit. The general feeling of the House, he believed, was that the Standing Order should be mandatory and obligatory, and the object of his Amendment was that that intention should be expressed in so many words. In the course of an examination of the Standing Orders, he had found only three out of 98 that were permissible in their wording. If it was intended that the Standing Order should be obligatory, why not say so? The House had been told sometimes by the Attorney General, or the Solicitor General, that in certain cases "may" meant "shall," but it was desirable above all things that a Standing Order should be clear and unmistakable in its intention, and therefore in order to avoid all possibility of doubt, he moved to substitute the word "shall" for the word "may."

Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment— In line 2, to leave out the second word "may," and insert the word "shall."—(Mr. Loder.)

Question proposed, "That the word 'may' stand part of the proposed Amendment."

(8.49.) MR. M'KENNA (Monmouthshire, N.)

thought the change from "may" to "shall" was not one that the House should be recommended to adopt. The functions of the Deputy Chairman were very uncertain, and it would be better to leave the proposal in its present vague form until some definite statement as to the duties of the office had been made. If the suggestion of the hon. Member for Norwich had been accepted, and it had been decided that the Deputy-Chairman's duties should include some of the duties at present discharged by the Chairman in regard to private Bills, and that a salary should attach to the office, it might have been better that the appointment should be made obligatory. But as the Deputy Chairman was, apparently, to come into existence only in the unavoidable absence of the Chairman of Ways and Means, it was preferable that the proposal should remain in its present form.

*(8.51.) MR. BLAKE

felt a great difficulty as to this appointment, having regard to the powers the new official would be called upon to exercise. The security the House expected and received in the exercise of the great powers of the Speaker, all of which were to be vested in this Deputy Chairman, was not after all so much dependent on his official and salaried position, as on the extraordinary and happy circumstances of the tenure of the appointment. The Speaker, by the understanding of the House, was the embodiment of the will of the House at large. When appointed, he abandoned all party connections in that House, and understood that he would, being worthy, receive the support and confidence of both sides of the House; that, although political fortunes might change, and those who had secured his election might become the minority, he would receive from the new House a renewal of confidence. That was the essential feature of the Speakership, and it made for the security, dignity, order and efficiency of the proceedings of the British House of Commons more than did any other element in its constitution. But the appointment of an official to fill the Chair only casually and for short intervals, and not under the venerable and valuable traditions to which he had referred, was a very different business. The office of Chairman of Committee of Ways and Means was not a very old one, and the question of the succession to the Speakership had not arisen in any acute form, as it might do. But perhaps there might exist in the hope of that succession, some restraining and elevating motive affecting the Chairman. But the lower one went down in the official hierarchy, from the Speaker to the Deputy Speaker, and from the Deputy Speaker to the Vice-Deputy Speaker, so to speak, the less these considerations weighed. The opportunities of occupying the Chair would be comparatively rare; the general atmosphere in which such a Member would dwell and the work he would do would still be that of a party politician. Thus many things concurred to render it difficult for him to reconcile himself to the exercise of the great powers proposed to be conferred on the new officer by this new rule. While, however, he was indisposed to agree to making the appointment obligatory, he did not think any hon. Member need be alarmed because the word was "may" and not "shall." The appointment did not require even the initiative of the Government. Under the rule, at the commencement of a Parliament, it might be competent for any Member to make such a proposition, and if the majority of the House favoured it, the appointment would be made; while it was rather absurd to suppose that, if the House was unfavourable, it should be forced to appoint. He had long thought, however, and he hoped that all would agree that, in the interests of the efficient conduct of business and of humanity towards the two principal officials of the House, some provision should be made by which the usual occupant of the Chair might obtain relief much more frequently than was at present the case. One slightly redeeming feature of the new rule was that it would enable some such provision to be made. His own view, perhaps coloured somewhat by experiences elsewhere, was that some method should be arranged by which it would be quite in accordant with etiquette, as well as within the range of possibility, for the occupant of the Chair to obtain frequently and easily a short relief from sitting in the Chair. In another Legislature of which he had had experience, a system had been adopted whereby the Speaker was able to call to the Chair, from time to time, any Member of the House, and was thus enabled to take advantage of some other posture than that of sitting—a posture that was both uncomfortable and detrimental to health if too long enforced. The rule would therefore be improved if it was not confined to cases in which an announcement was made of the unavoidable absence of the Speaker, and the impossibility of his taking the Chair. Such a provision as he had suggested would conduce to the comfort and health of the Speaker, and the comfort and health of the Speaker were in no unimportant sense also for the comfort and smooth conduct of the House.

(9.0.) THE SECRETARY TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. GRANT LAWSON,) Yorkshire, N.R., Thirsk

said he was very glad to be able to agree with a great deal that had been said by the hon. Member who had just sat down, who had had great experience in regard to this question. He thought if the House was ever likely to adopt this view, the weighty reasons which had just been given by the hon. Member would persuade the House at once to appoint such an officer. He hoped, however, that the hon. Member would not press his Amendment, because it was not usual for the House to give a mandatory instruction to itself that it should appoint a Deputy Chairman. If the proposal were agreed to, he did not see how they were going to enforce such an instruction against the wishes of the House, for they could not get a mandamus from a judge. For his part he could not conceive of a Government which had the opportunity of conferring an additional honour and responsibility upon an hon. Member of the House refusing to do so, when the whole House were anxious that such an appointment should be conferred.

MR. LODER

asked leave to withdraw his Amendment. [Opposition cries of "No, no."]

Question, "That the word 'may' stand part of the proposed Amendment," put, and agreed to.

(9.5.) MR. M'KENNA

said that the effect of the Amendment he now proposed would be to leave the question open. Even the Colonial Secretary had stated that it would probably be necessary to consider the whole question of private business. One of the subjects for the consideration of any Committee that might be appointed ought to be the duties of that Deputy Chairman, and if the Government accepted this Amendment they could either adhere to their present attitude of not paying the Deputy Speaker, or if they wished it they might make him an official of the House. The objection to the proposal as it stood at present was that it bound the Government not to appoint a Deputy Speaker to be paid. If the First Lord of the Treasury adhered to that attitude it would cause considerable difficulty in dealing with some of the proposals later on. He questioned whether it was wise to give such powers to an hon. Member appointed casually to this position. He thought it was advisable that the Government should now leave the matter open, and be guided in their future decision by whatever conclusions the Committee might come to.

Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment, in line 3, to leave out the words— Whenever the House is informed of the unavoidable absence of the Chairman of Ways and Means."—(Mr. M'Kenna.)

Question proposed, "That the words 'whenever the House is informed' stand part of the proposed Amendment."

MR. GRANT LAWSON

said he could not accept the Amendment, and pointed out that to leave out these words would aggrandise the position and power of the new official by making it possible for him to take the chair at other times than in the unavoidable absence of the Chairman of Ways and Means.

MR. BARTLEY

thought they should stick to the old idea that the Speaker and the Chairman of Ways and Means should be the officers, and that the Deputy Chairman should only act in one of those sad events when both Mr. Speaker and the Chairman were struck down by illness, and when they could not carry on their business. He trusted they would not make this another salaried appointment. If this were made a valuable appointment it might be filled in a way which some of them would not like. He did not think that in these days of enormously increasing expenditure they ought to make any more lucrative appointments in the House of Commons.

* Mr. SPEAKER

I think the question of whether he should be a paid Deputy Chairman or not does not arise on this Amendment.

(9.14.) MR. GIBSON BOWLES

said he thought the hon. Member who had moved this Amendment was under a little misapprehension. He pointed out that the rule as it stood on the Paper empowered the Deputy Chairman to take the chair when the Chairman of Ways and Means was absent.

MR. M'KENNA

The words are "whenever the House is informed."

MR. GIBSON BOWLES

Quite so. "Whenever the House is informed." There was a new phraseology introduced into these rules. He did not know in the least what the "Chairman of Ways and Means" was. He knew what "Chairman of Committee of Ways and Means" meant, but the expression "Chairman of Ways and Means" had no more meaning than "Chairman of Hopes and Fears." He only mentioned that to show that the phraseology was a little slipshod. Again, the Amendment entitled the Deputy Chairman to exercise all the powers of the Chairman of Ways and Means, including his powers as Deputy Speaker. These latter words were surplusage.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

Not at all.

MR. GIBSON BOWLES

Does not "all" mean "all"? He submitted, however, that the words the hon. Member proposed to omit were very necessary, because they limited the occasions on which the new officer could act. He was not inclined to multiply indefinitely the occasions when this new official was to play the part of Speaker. He would have enormous powers. He would have the power of suspending anyone, and of requiring an apology from any one of them. [An Hon. Member: A sincere apology.] He would have the entirely new power of suspending the sitting of the House. Then there was the closure.

* Mr. SPEAKER

The only question now before the House is whether the words "Whenever the House is informed of the unavoidable absence of the Chairman of Ways and Means" should be omitted.

MR. GIBSON BOWLES

said it was extremely advisable from his point of view to limit the powers of the Deputy Chairman as much as possible. They were having created a new officer, and they did not know whether he was to be paid or unpaid. The only expression he had heard on the subject was in the shape of an Amendment which was ruled out of order. But whether paid or unpaid, they did know it was proposed that he should have very extensive powers. He was therefore of opinion that the words proposed to be omitted should be retained.

MR. M'KENNA

asked leave to with draw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment amended, by inserting in line 3, after the word "informed," the words "by the Clerk at the Table."

(9.25.) Mr. GIBSON BOWLES

in moving to leave out the words "including his powers as Deputy Speaker," said he thought the House really must have some respect to the real meaning of words. The Amendment invested the new officer with all the powers of the Chairman of Ways and Means. "All" must mean "all," and the powers as Deputy Speaker would be included.

Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment, as amended— In line 5, after the word 'Means,' to leave out the words 'including his powers as Deputy Speaker.'"—(Mr. Gibson Bowles.)

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the proposed Amendment, as amended."

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I would advise my hon. friend not to press the Amendment. I entirely agree that "all" does mean "all," even in the Standing Orders of the House of Commons; but it is convenient to make us all familiar with the Standing Orders of the House, so that any one glancing at the rule will see at once what is the most important power included in the word "all." It is only on that ground that I defend the Amendment as drawn, though I admit it is not grammatical or logical.

MR. GIBSON BOWLES

Very well, Sir, with that deference I always endeavour to show the right hon. Gentleman, although I confess he has not convinced me, I ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment to the proposed Amendment, as amended, by leave, withdrawn.

(9.32.) MR. SWIFT MACNEILL

moved to add at the end of the Amendment, "Provided always that no holder of a directorship in a public company shall be eligible for appointment to the position of Deputy Chairman." This was by no means a laughing matter. All the enormous powers of the Speaker were to be granted to the new Deputy Chairman—the power to stop the order of debate, to adjourn the House, to order any one out of the House, and other powers little short of despotic; but he was not to be in reality a paid official of the House. Now, if the gentleman were a paid official, no matter how great his powers, as long as his salary was on the Votes, so long would they have their grip upon him, and so long would he be obedient to the great moral sanction and public opinion of the House. The right hon. Gentleman proposed as Deputy Chairman was an amphibious creature, who might be a partisan as much as he was. He maintained that the Chairman of Committees should be removed as far as possible from all suspicion of the trail of finance. The head of this House should not be a company director, above all, the Gentleman exercising the position of Chairman of Committees, and for this reason: that day after day matters came up in Committee connected with company law-and company promotion. Let them, for God's sake, provide that even the most prejudiced Member of the House should feel convinced that the order he heard from the Chair was not the grunt of a guinea-pig. The honour of the position was such that the occupant of the Chair ought to be a man imbued with the traditions of this House, that he should give his entire thought and services to the public good, and should not be in the slightest degree subject to the suspicion that he must be affected by the financial transactions of any company. It was well known that a Judge on the Bench, no matter how highly placed, would not be allowed to sit in judgment on a case in which he had the slightest interest. He threw no imputation on the present Government of all the talents and all the virtues the world had ever seen, but he could imagine the extreme length to which this rule could be carried by an unscrupulous Government, determined, as far as they could, to abridge the privileges of the House of Commons, and the rights of free speech. He could imagine such a Government putting into that Chair another Bludgeon Hardacres who would, at will, order Members out of the House of Commons. The Deputy Chairman should be, like Cæsar's wife, above suspicion; and should have nothing to do with those financial relations which seemed to dog, in some mysterious way, the steps of the present Government. He begged to give notice that if the Gentleman to be proposed for the position of Deputy Chairman had any connection whatever with company promoting he would expose his financial arrangements to the House.

Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment, as amended in line 6, at the end, to add the words— Provided always, that no holder of a Directorship in a Public Company shall be eligible for appointment as Deputy Chairman."—(Mr. Swift MacNeill.)

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be added to the proposed Amendment, as amended, be there added."

(9.35.) Mr A. J. BALFOUR

The hon. Gentleman has got directors on the brain. He says that the Deputy Chairman should be, like Cæsar's wife, above suspicion. By that he means, apparently, that he should not hold a directorship. If Cæsar's wife had the misfortune of living in the days of the hon. Gentleman she would not have been above suspicion.

MR. SWIFT MACNEILL

I never said anything against the lady in my life.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

At any rate the hon. Gentleman must remember that to pass this regulation with regard to the Deputy Chairman alone would be very invidious. You must extend it to the other officers of the House. Again, the arguments he has advanced would prevent any man being either Speaker or Chairman of Committees or Deputy Chairman who holds any property either in land, or Consols, or in any foreign stocks such as Egyptian or African stocks, which are influenced by action in this House. I have never been asked myself to be a director of a company, and I rather suspect that the hon. Gentleman has never been asked either.

MR. SWIFT MACNEILL

I have been asked, but I refused.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

Then the hon. Gentleman has the advantage of me. But we must remember that in the conditions of modern industry all great commercial works are carried on by companies. It is most important that those companies should be directed by the best men; and, though I and the hon. Gentleman have not the good fortune to be included among these best men, it is desirable that no discouragement should be thrown in the way of their employment. Of course, I quite agree there are persons who may be called professional directors, who are supposed to give little but their names to the companies with which they are connected. I should be sorry to see a person in that capacity exercising a very responsible position in this House. But it would be improper for us to apply to one officer a general regulation which we did not apply to all; and I, therefore, hope the hon. Gentleman will on reflection withdraw his Amendment.

(9.42.) SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT

I claim the same disqualification as the right hon. Gentleman. I have never been a director of any public company, and I confess I do not think it is a special qualification for a Member of this House. I think there is a great deal too much of it. It is an evil that is growing every day. I believe it exercises an influence in this House which is not beneficial to its action and which detracts from the reputation of the House outside. I feel that extremely strongly. I do not agree that it is possible to put it in the form of an Amendment, but, in my opinion, it ought to be the governing principle with those who have the appointment of men to positions of responsibility in this House, especially to such positions as exercise overwhelming influence on the conduct of Private Bills. This professional directorship is, in my opinion, an infinite social evil which is working immense mischief in all classes of society; and I regret to say I trace its evil influence in this House. Therefore, whatever we may do in the way of express legislation, I am extremely glad there should be an open declaration of opinion in this House, that it should be looked upon as a disqualification with regard to positions in the House. I am glad that my hon. friend has introduced the subject. I do not think he can carry it in an Amendment in this form; I should rather wish that the public opinion of this House should be against positions of this kind being given to men who accumulate directorships in businesses to which they cannot attend, and which, if they did attend to them, would be a disqualification for their doing the business of this House. Therefore, I think we should have, not a self-denying ordinance, but a self-qualifying ordinance, by which men who claim to take a part in the public affairs of this country should give their time, their energies, and their character to the public service.

(9.45.) MR. VICARY GIBBS (Hertfortshire, St. Albans)

said that why such a qualification as was sought to be imposed by the Amendment should apply to the Deputy Chairman any more than to Mr. Speaker or the Chairman of Committees or any other officer of the House, he was at a loss to understand. If there was any rule of the House which made it obligatory, of course he was quite ready to accept it.

SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT

There is an unwritten law that the Speaker of this House should not be what is called a guinea pig.

MR. VICARY GIBBS

saw no reason for the interposition of such an expression as guinea pig. Such a thing was a monstrous attack on a respectable and useful class of the community. To refer to the whole class of directors as guinea pigs because some people abused their position and took money for work which they did not do, was most in just. The right hon. Gentleman had no right to assume that all directors were dishonest and unfit for office in this House. The hon. Gentleman who moved the Amendment had spoken very strongly with regard to directors and said they were all tarred with the financial brush, or that the trail of finance was over them all, or something of that kind. He seemed to think they were all dishonest.

MR. SWIFT MACNEILL

I beg the hon. Gentleman's pardon, I said nothing of the kind. What I said was, that such a person was unfit for a public position in this House.

MR. VICARY GIBBS

said it came to this, that so long as a person was a member of a private firm he was a fit and proper person to fill a public office in this House, but directly his business was turned into a limited company and when he became a director he became unfit. He hoped they would not be led away in this matter. No doubt the position of director had in some cases been abused, but the position of a director qua director was no more discreditable to a man, than the position of a trader who was the head of his own firm; and so long as a man conducted himself properly in this House his business outside was no concern of anybody's.

(9.52.) MR. FIELD (Dublin, St. Patrick)

said the hon. Member who had just spoken had entirely misinterpreted the spirit of the Amendment. Every hon. Member must be aware of the fact that there were directors in this House of public companies of various kinds who came into contact with the Government, and who undoubtedly did influence a large number of hon. Members to a large extent. He had had a great deal to do with opposing Railway Bills, and he asked what would become of those Bills if the Deputy Speaker happened to be a director of the company that promoted them. There could be no question about it, there was a large public danger in having a director of a public company placed in a judicial position in the House, and he trusted the hon. Member would press this matter to a division. Mr. Gladstone discouraged entirely the idea of having as Cabinet Ministers men who were directors of public companies. Such discouragement however, was not a strong feature of the present Government, and the result was that when a Railway Bill came before the House those who wished to criticise the measure seldom got a chance, because the directors of the companies brought such strong pressure to bear upon the Government. In the majority of the Parliaments of Europe there was a rule which prohibited members of the Government sitting as directors of public companies. Such a rule was a great safeguard, and there was no doubt that public opinion recognised the fact that financiers and directors of public companies ought not to occupy prominent positions in this House. Officials of this House ought to be above suspicion. If a division was pressed, he would certainly be found in the lobby with his hon. friend.

MR. JAMES LOWTHER (Kent, Thanet)

, said he held strongly that no person occupying a position in the Government or an office in this House itself ought to be connected with a public company. But he hoped the hon. Gentleman would not press his Amendment, because it did not make the point quite clear. If only the Deputy Chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means were precluded by express resolution from occupying the position of a director, that would imply that the members of the Government and, other officers of the House, were not precluded. Mr. Disraeli compelled every member of his Governments, high and low, to resign their connection as directors of public companies. There had not been any abuse of the practice, he thought, in the present Government, but he thought the general principle ought to be enforced, and his objection to the Amendment was that it did not enforce it in its entirety.

(10.0.) MR. JOHN BURNS (Battersea)

said the attitude taken up by the right hon. Gentleman who had just addressed the House had secured the warm approval of Members on all sides of the House who did not agree with him in general matters, but he had suggested no way out of the difficulty. It was because he thought the Amendment provided a way out that he wished to give one or two reasons why he supported it. It was not the fault of the hon. Member for South Donegal that in moving his Amendment he could not make it apply to other officers, because not for a generation had there been an opportunity of discussing this principle in connection with a post of this kind. It had never been raised in connection with the high post which Mr. Speaker had with such dignity and probity filled. This was the only opportunity which had been given for 30 years. He earnestly trusted that the Amendment would be pressed to a division, and that whenever an opportunity occurred for revising the terms and conditions under which all the offices of the House were filled, the Amendment of the hon. Member for South Donegal would be taken as a precedent. The House need not go to Mr. Disraeli or Mr. Gladstone for precedent in matters of this sort. All that was necessary was to read the daily prayers of the House, and to apply the spirit and letter of those prayers to this matter. In Committees that was done, because Members could not sit on a Private Bill Commiteee unless they took an oath that neither they nor their constituency had any interest in the Bills with which they were to deal, The British Judiciary had earned universal respect because of the feeling which prevailed that our Judges were free from the taint of financial interest or company promoting. The Home Secretary in his Clubs Registration Bill had provided that a clerk to a bench of magistrates should not be interested in any licence, and if the argument was good enough in that case as well as in that of our Civil servants, it was good enough to apply to the new Deputy Chairman. Commercial interests were becoming gradually crystallised in this country; capital was aggregating in fewer hands; limited liability was taking the place of old private ownership; and where before a private employer was frequently compelled by virtue of his personal responsibility to "tread the narrow path that leads to righteous-

ness," and to do that which he did not want to do because it was right, he was now able to take other action as a company director. He asked the House to take the case of a private Railway Bill, with housing clauses and schemes for contracting out of friendly societies. It was asking too much of a Deputy Chairman to sit in the chair and deal with a Bill in which his own company might probably be interested. Prevention was better than cure, and for that reason he supported the Amendment. When there was such a tendency on the part of our newspapers and our commercial men to slavishly imitate American customs, we should not forget that in some of the American States Parliaments a rule like this had been rendered absolutely necessary by reason of the pressure that had been brought to bear on men holding public positions. He should go into the lobby with the hon. Member for South Donegal, who he thought deserved the thanks of the country and of Parliament for his efforts in trying to raise every officer in Parliament above the breath of suspicion, and to prevent any abuses which might arise in this direction.

(10.8.) Question put.

The House divided:—Ayes, 120; Noes' 207. (Division List No. 19).

AYES.
Abraham, W. (Cork, N. E.)	Cogan, Denis J.	Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton
Allan, William (Gateshead)	Condon, Thomas Joseph	Haldane, Richard Burdon
Ambrose, Robert	Crean, Eugene	Hammond, John
Asher, Alexander	Cremer, William Randal	Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Sir W.
Ashton, Thomas Gair	Cullinan, J.	Harwood, George
Atherley-Jones, L	Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)	Hayden, John Patrick
Barry, E. (Cork, S.)	Delany, William	Hemphill, Rt. Hon. C. H.
Bayley, T. (Derbyshire)	Dewar, J. A. (Inverness-sh.	Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.
Bell, Richard	Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles	Holland, William Henry
Blake, Edward	Dillon, John	Jordan, Jeremiah
Boland, John	Doogan, P. C.	Joyce, Michael
Brigg, John	Edwards, Frank	Kinloch, Sir John G. S.
Broadhurst, Henry	Emmott, Alfred	Kitson, Sir James
Burns, John	Farrell, James Patrick	Labouchere, Henry
Caine, William Sproston	Fenwick, Charles	Langley, Batty
Caldwell, James	Ffrench, Peter	Layland-Barratt, Francis
Cameron, Robert	Field, William	Levy, Maurice
Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.	Flynn, James Christopher	Lewis, John Herbert
Cautley, Henry Strother	Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)	Lloyd George, David
Cawley, Frederick	Gilhooly, James	Lough, Thomas
Channing, Francis Allston	Goddard, Daniel Ford	Lundon, W.
Clancy, John Joseph	Grant, Corrie	MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.
Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.	O'Connor, J. (Wicklow, W.)	Sinclair John (Forfarshire)
MacNeill, John Gordon S.	O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)	Soares, Ernest J.
M'Fadden, Edward	O'Donnell, J. (Mayo, S.)	Sullivan, Donal
M'Hugh, Patrick A.	O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)	Thomas, David A. (Merthyr)
M'Kenna, Reginald	O'Dowd, John	Thomas, J. A. (Glamorgan, G.
M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)	O'Kelly, J. (Roscommon, N.)	Tomkinson, James
Mooney, John J.	O'Malley, William	Trevelyan, Charles Philip
Morgan, J. L. (Carmarthen)	O'Shaughnessy, P. J.	Wallace, Robert
Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)	O'Shee, James John	Walton, J. L. (Leeds, S.)
Moss, Samuel	Power, Patrick Joseph	Wason, E. (Clackmannan)
Murphy, John	Price, Robert John	White, Luke (York, E. R.)
Nannetti, Joseph P.	Reddy, M.	White, P. (Meath, North)
Newnes, Sir George	Redmond, J. E. (Waterford)	Williams, O. (Merioneth)
Nolan, Col. J. P. (Galway, N.)	Roberts, J. H. (Denbighs)	Yoxall, James Henry
Nolan, J. (Louth, South)	Robson, William Snowdon
Norman, Henry	Roche, John	TELLERS FOR THE AYES—
O'Brien, J. F. X. (Cork)	Runciman, Walter	Sir Thomas Osmonde and
O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.)	Saunderson, Rt. Hn. Col. E. J.	Captain Donelan.
O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)	Schwann, Charles E.
O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)	Sheehan, Daniel D.
NOES.
Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir A. F.	Dickson, Charles Scott	Helder, Augustus
Agg-Gardner, James Tynte	Digby, J. K. D. Wingfield-	Hoare, Sir Samuel
Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel	Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph	Hogg, Lindsay
Archdale, Edward Mervyn	Dorington, Sir John Edward	Hope, J. F. (S'ffeld, Brightside
Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.	Doughty, George	Hornby, Sir William Henry
Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John	Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-	Houldsworth, Sir W. H.
Austin, Sir John	Duke, Henry Edward	Hoult, Joseph
Bailey, James (Walworth)	Durning-Lawrence, Sir E.	Hudson, George Bickersteth
Bain, Col. James Robert	Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir W. H.	Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick
Balfour, Rt. Hn. A.J. (Manch'r	Faber, E. B. (Hants, W.)	Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton
Balfour, Rt. Hon. G. W. (Leeds	Fardell, Sir T. George	Johnston, William (Belfast)
Banbury, Frederick George	Fellowes, Rt. Hon. A. E.	Joicey, Sir James
Barry, Sir F. T. (Windsor)	Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J.(Manc'r	Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H.
Beach, Rt. Hon. Sir M. H.	Fielden, Edward B.	Kenyon, Hon. G. T. (Denbigh
Bentinck, Lord Henry C.	Finch, George H.	Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop
Bignold, Arthur	Finlay, Sir Robert B.	Keswick, William
Blundell, Col. Henry	Fisher, William Hayes	Knowles, Lees
Bond, Edward	FitzGerald, Sir Robert P.	Lawson, John Grant
Bowles, T. G. (King's Lynn)	Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A.	Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage
Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John	Flannery, Sir Fortescue	Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie
Brookfield, Col. Montagu	Fietcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry	Leveson-Gower, F. N. S.
Brymer, William Ernest	Flower, Ernest	Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.
Bull, William James	Foster, Sir M. (Lond. Univ.)	Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Bristol, S.
Bullard, Sir Harry	Foster, P. S. (Warwick, S. W.)	Lonsdale, John Brownlee
Butcher, John George	Galloway, William Johnson	Lowe, Francis William
Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir E. H.	Gardner, Ernest	Loyd, Archie Kirkman
Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs.)	Garfit, William	Lucas, Col. F. (Lowestoft)
Cavendish, V. C. W. (Dy'shire)	Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)	Lucas, R. J. (Portsmouth)
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.	Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin& Nairn)	Macartney, Rt. Hon. W. G. E.
Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)	Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.)	MacIver, David (Liverpool)
Chapman, Edward	Gore, Hon. S. F. O. (Linc.)	M'Calmont, Cl. H. L. B. (Cambs.
Churchill, Winston Spencer	Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.	M'Calmont, Col. J. (Antrim, E.)
Clare, Octavius Leigh	Goulding, Edward Alfred	M'Iver, Sir L. (Edinburgh, W.)
Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.	Gray, Ernest (West Ham)	Majendie, James A. H.
Cohen, Benjamin Lewis	Green, W. D. (Wednesbury)	Manners, Lord Cecil
Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse	Greene, Sir E. W. (B'rySEd'mds	Martin, Richard Biddulph
Colomb, Sir John C. R.	Gretton, John	Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfries-sh.
Colston, Chas. E. H. A.	Halsey, Thomas Frederick	Mildmay, Francis Bingham
Corbett, A. C. (Glasgow)	Hamilton, Rt. Hn Lord G. (Mid'x	Milvain, Thomas
Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)	Hardy, L. (Kent, Ashford)	Mitchell, William
Cranborne, Viscount	Hare, Thomas Leigh	Molesworth, Sir Lewis
Cross, H. S. (Bolton)	Harris, Frederick Leverton	Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)
Cubitt, Hon. Henry	Haslam, Sir Alfred S.	More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)
Dalkeith, Earl of	Hatch, Ernest Frederick G.	Morgan, David J. (Walthamst'w
Dalrymple, Sir Charles	Hay, Hon. Claude George	Morrison, James Archibald
Davies, M. V. (Cardigan)	Heath, Arthur H. (Hanley)	Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)
Denny, Colonel	Heath, J. (Staffords, N. W.)	Moulton, John Fletcher

Muntz, Philip A.	Rothschild, Hon. Lionel W.	Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward
Murray, Rt. Hon. A. G. (Bute)	Royds, Clement Molyneux	Valentia, Viscount
Nicholson, William Graham	Russell, T. W.	Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)
Nicol, Donald Ninian	Rutherford, John	Walker, Col. William Hall
Parker, Gilbert	Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-	Wanklyn, James Leslie
Peel, Hon. Wm. Robt. Wellesley	Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)	Warr, Augustus Frederick
Percy, Earl	Seely, C. H. (Lincoln)	Wason, J. Cathcart (Orkney)
Pilkington, Lieut.-Col. Richard	Seely, Capt. J. E. B (Isle of Wi'ht.	Webb, Col. William George
Platt-Higgins, Frederick	Sharpe, William Edward T.	Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon.
Plummer, Walter R.	Simeon, Sir Barrington	Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne
Powell, Sir Francis Sharp	Skewes-Cox, Thomas	Whittaker, Thomas Palmer
Pretyman, Ernest George	Smith, Jas. Parker (Lanarks.)	Wilson, F. W. (Norfolk, Mid.)
Pryce-Jones, Lieut.-Col. Edwd.	Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich	Wilson, John (Glasgow)
Pym, C. Guy	Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)	Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks.
Rankin, Sir James	Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)	Wodehouse, Rt, Hn. E. R. (Bath)
Rasch, Major Frederic Carne	Stewart, Sir M. J. M'Taggart	Wylie, Alexander
Rattigan, Sir William Henry	Stock, James Henry	Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George
Reid, James (Greenock)	Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier	Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong
Renshaw, Charles Bine	Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)
Ridley, S. F. (Bethnal Green)	Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Oxf'dUni.)	TELLERS FOR THE NOES—
Ritchie, Rt. Hon. C. Thomson	Thorburn, Sir Walter	Sir William Walrond and
Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)	Tollemache, Henry James	Mr. Anstruther.
Robertson, Herbt. (Hackney)	Tomlinson, Wm. Edwd. Murray
Rolleston, Sir John F. L.	Tritton, Charles Ernest

(10.21.) MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.)

said that if he had been present at an earlier stage he should strongly have supported the proposal that the Deputy Chairman should be a salaried official of the House. For many years he had held the view that the Chairman of Committees was far too hard-worked a man, and that there ought to be an Assistant Chairman. He altogether objected, however, to taking a Member from the rank and file of a Party, and from time to time putting him in the Chair, without any position as an official of the House. When any Member was appointed an official of the House he undoubtedly did, to a certain extent, divest his mind of Party bias, and assumed a new relation towards the House. He ought to be bound, and, he believed, generally was bound, by the principle of impartiality in his conduct in the Chair. But how could they expect a man taken suddenly from the rank and file of the Party majority and put into the Chair, with all the great powers that were proposed to be conferred upon him, at once, and for the time being, to divest himself of all Party feeling, to forget he was a supporter of the Ministry, and to act in the spirit in which a man invested with such powers ought to act? It was an impossibility, and such a provision would be a gross injustice to the House as a whole, and especially to the Members of the Op- position. He had always held that it was most desirable that the Chairman of Committees, who was now invested with all the powers of the Chair, and had as great judicial functions as the Speaker himself, should occupy the same position as the Speaker. It was a bad survival that the Chairman of Committees was at present, to some extent, still a Party man. It would be a great improvement if the Chairman was elected in the same way as the Speaker, with the same solemn formalities, and retained his position no matter how political Parties might alter. Such a procedure would increase the confidence of the House in his rulings, and increase his authority in every way. The same ought to be the case also with the Deputy Chairman. The feeling in favour of making the Chairman of Committees a permanent official of the House, had enormously increased since the advent of the rule conferring on him the power of granting the closure and of inflicting punishment. No ordinary Member of the House ought to have the power to punish his fellow Members. In that contention he had all the authority of past experience behind him, because, when the Punishment Rule was introduced, and on the two or three occasions when its stringency had been increased, and also when the Closure Rules were brought in, it was specially ordained by the House that no temporary Chairman should be invested with these extraordinary powers. He therefore proposed to move the addition of the words— Except the power of granting the closure or naming a Member of the House for disregarding the ruling of the Chair. The Deputy Chairman would still have all the powers necessary to secure the House against being obliged to suspend its sittings in the event of the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker being ill at the same time. It might be argued that by the Amendment, a good deal of the usefulness of the Assistant Chairman would be taken away. His answer to that objection was that if the First Lord of the Treasury would agree to make the Assistant Chairman a permanent official of the House, he would at once withdraw the Amendment. But if the right hon. Gentleman intended to appoint as Deputy Chairman an ordinary Member of the working majority, with no standing as an official, who would occupy the Chair only on very rare occasion, he had no right to ask for these extraordinary powers. The question should be approached in a broader and more comprehensive manner. There should be an Assistant Chairman of Committees, with a salary, and both the Chairman and his Assistant should be permanent officials of the House. He was strongly in favour of the suggestion made by the hon. Member for South Longford. It was a cruelty on the part of the House to keep Mr. Speaker in the Chair for seven or eight or more hours a day. No man's health could stand it, and there was no reason why, regularly, every evening, Mr. Speaker should not call on the Chairman or Deputy Chairman to take the Chair for an hour or an hour and a half, to enable him to break the horrible and disastrous monotony of sitting in the Chair. There was nothing to prevent Mr. Speaker asking this Deputy to take the Chair when he required an hour or two to rest. He wished the First Lord of the Treasury to give his careful attention to this proposal, otherwise he should have to divide the House upon it.

Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment, as amended— In line 6, at the end, to add the words except the power of granting the closure or naming a Member of the House for disregarding the ruling of the Chair.' "—(Mr. Dillon.)

Question proposed. "That those words be there added."

(10.33.) MR. A. J. BALFOUR

It appears to me that we could not very properly accept the Amendment of the hon. Gentleman. It may be desirable to have a third official capable of taking the place of Chairman of Committees in the event of Mr. Speaker and the Chairman being ill. If, after an investigation of the work thrown upon the Chairman of Committees under the new system, we find that he is an over-worked official, then it will be desirable that such a proposal should be adopted. We had an Amendment the other night with regard to sending these rules to a Committee, and I replied to that proposal by saying that there were several questions upon which we did not feel the same confidence in suggesting alterations, and this question was one of them. I do not think that we ought rashly and without investigation to add to the number of paid officials of the Government.

MR. DILLON

Of the House.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

Let us really look at facts as they are. Each Party always nominates the Chairman of Committees, and the proposal of the hon. Member is to add another to the number of persons in places of emolument coming in and going out with the Government. As to the suggestion that the power of naming a Member should be withheld from the third person in the hierarchy of those presiding over the debates of the House, I desire to point out that the power exists already, and that the hon. Member's proposal is not to refuse to add to the powers of that official, but to take away from those which he already possesses. Five temporary Chairmen have the power of naming a Member, and that practice has existed for many years without the smallest abuse or prejudice. I think it is proper to add to those powers the power of applying the closure. Let the House in these rules deal with the situation with which we are thoroughly competent to deal, and reserve the special investigations of the Committee for the more complicated aspects of the question. Under these circumstances I am not able to accept the proposal which the hon. Member has made.

(10.36.) SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT

The subject of paying this Deputy Chairman is a matter deserving very careful consideration. In regard to the use of the closure I hold a very strong opinion. When the closure was first introduced we believed it was a necessary power which would not be very frequently used. That was the expectation at the time when the closure was introduced, but that expectation has not been fulfilled. The use of the closure has been multiplied every year, and, in my opinion, the closure is one of the means and one of the principal causes of obstruction. The closure creates a spirit of irritation and of resistance which is extremely injurious to the progress of business. For this reason I do not desire to multiply the opportunities for applying the closure, for nothing but mischief will result from giving these great and dangerous powers to those who are not accustomed to the use of them. Therefore, for my own part, if the hon. Member goes to a division upon the question of excluding the closure in the case of the Deputy Chairman I shall support him. I think it is an extremely dangerous power to give, and therefore I shall vote for its exclusion.

MR. GIBSON BOWLES

said that this proposal would not only give the Deputy Chairman the power of naming hon. Members which was already enjoyed by five other Chairmen, and also the power of using the closure, but it would also give him the power, at his own will, of suspending the debate.

MR. SPEAKER

Order, order! The hon. Member must confine his remarks to the power of granting the closure and of naming. [Ironical Ministerial cheers.]

MR. GIBSON BOWLES

said he did not know what was arousing the enthusiasm of his hon. friends behind him. He submitted that it was important to glance at the other powers which the proposal gave to this Deputy Chairman, but he would confine himself to the closure. The closure was the very marrow of this rule. Why was this rule required? It was only required upon the extraordinary and rare occasion upon which Mr. Speaker and the Chairman of Ways and Means were incapable of serving. He had looked carefully through the journals of this House, and he had found occasions when the Speaker was unable to serve, and when the House had to cease sitting. That, however, had only been for a few days and was there any great evil in that? That state of things could be met by making the session so many days longer. Last year they sat only 118 days.

* Mr. SPEAKER

Order, order! The House is now discussing the propriety of excepting from the powers of the Deputy Chairman the power of granting the closure or of naming an hon. Member of the House for disregarding the ruling of the Chair. Therefore the only question which it is competent for the hon. Members to discuss is the closure and naming. [Ironical Ministerial cheers and derisive laughter.]

MR. GIBSON BOWLES

said he was much obliged to hon. Members, for he recognised amongst some of those behind him who laughed those who rarely attended the House. One contingency for which this rule was required was the contingency of applying the closure when the Chairman of Ways and Means was absent. Last session the closure was moved 82 times, which was a larger number than upon any previous occasion except in the year 1896. In 1900 the closure was moved only 26 times, and in 1899 only 33 times. Therefore, the absence of the Chairman of Committees did not preclude His Majesty's Government from using the closure very freely. He hoped that this power of the closure was one which would be most sparingly used. He agreed with the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Monmouthshire when he said that the closure was to a great extent the cause of obstruction. [Ministerial cheers.] Undoubtedly he recognised in those cheers hon. Members who did not attend this House at the time the closure was moved.

Colonel SAUNDERSON

rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put;" but Mr. Speaker withheld his assent, and declined then to put that Question.

MR. GIBSON BOWLES

(resuming) said this was a dangerous power to give to a Gentleman of whom at present they did not know anything. They did not even know whether he was to have a salary, and he was very jealous of placing the power of the closure in the hands of any Gentleman who might be appointed. Although he did not like to vote for an Amendment against the Government, still he must confess that his desire was that the Government would devise some means whereby the objections he had pointed out could be avoided.

(10.47.) MR. DALZIEL (Kirkcaldy Burghs)

said he wished to point out that the proposal was to give really more power to the new Deputy Chairman than the present Chairman had. If the Chairman named a Member in Committee he immediately reported to the House, the Speaker being sent for; but under the new Rule, if the Speaker and the Chairman of Committees were both indisposed, the Deputy Chairman would exercise the full powers of the Speaker. They were asked to give this new power to an unknown person. It was a power which no occupant of the Chair except the Speaker had ever had before, and he was doubtful whether that power ought to be given. In the present circumstances the Deputy Chairman represented both sides of the House, but that would not be so under the proposed new arrangement. He would be appointed by the Government, and would probably be an arduous supporter of the Government. That would be one of his principal qualifications for the post. The new Deputy Chairman was to be a Party man, and it was because of that that the House ought to move with the greatest caution before equipping him with the power that belonged to the Speaker. They were discussing this question with a limited idea of what the real intention of the Government was. It was difficult to describe the power that this new man was to have until they knew the mind of the Government as to what the position of this person was to be. If the new Deputy Chairman was going to take the Chair for a few hours in the afternoon, then undoubtedly under the Rule as proposed he would be wielding more power than he ought to have; but perhaps he was only to preside on rare occasions when the Speaker was indisposed. They were groping in the dark, because the Government did not seem to have made up their mind as to what they really desired. They were going to have a Committee to settle this question. Surely then, the question might very easily be deferred until that Committee had reported. The odds were a thousand to one against the chance of both the Speaker and the Chairman being indisposed at the same time, pending the presentation of the Committee's Report. Why should they anticipate the decision the Committee would arrive at by adopting the proposal now before the House? He submitted that a case had not been made out for such a premature decision on this point, and that they ought to have the Report of the Committee before deciding in favour of the proposal of the Government.

*(10.52.) MR. CHAPLIN (Lincolnshire, Sleaford)

Whatever else may be said, whether its merits be good or bad, no one will deny that the Amendment is thoroughly consistent with the statement made on Friday night in the closing words of the First Lord of the Treasury. What is the closure? The closure is the great instrument for preventing obstruction in the House, and almost at the end of his speech, to my great regret, and my still greater surprise, my right hon. friend who leads this House made this statement— These rules were not brought forward with the purpose of diminishing obstruction. I have never claimed for them that they would diminish obstruction…. and then he went on, I do not believe that they will have that effect. That statement gave rise in my mind to a variety of considerations upon which we shall have other and more legitimate opportunities before the debates are closed of expressing our opinion, but if these rules are not intended to prevent or diminish obstruction, it may be asked why, in the opinion of the man who has no intention of this kind, must this proposal be opposed. When I heard his opening statement about these rules I was fully prepared to give them a friendly and even a cordial consideration. But I must frankly state both to the House and to my right hon. friend that in the face of the statement he has made, unless it is capable of some explanation I am not aware of, the main object in my mind of this great change in the rules now submitted to Parliament practically disappears, and it is difficult for me to understand why opposition should be offered to the Amendment by Gentlemen holding the view that these rules are not intended to diminish obstruction, and that it has never been believed they will have that effect. So far as I am concerned, I do desire to get rid of, or to diminish as far as possible by any new rules, that obstruction to the business of the House which year by year has been growing steadily greater, and which has inflicted such injury on the reputation of the House. That is the thing I desire above all to see altered myself, and I believe the only way to accomplish it is by devising rules which are intended to and will diminish obstruction. So far as I am concerned therefore I shall with perfect consistency support this Amendment.

(10.57.) SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN

I very strongly sympathise with the view taken by my hon. friend the Member for the Kirkcaldy Burghs in that part of his observations where he said that we had some reason to complain of the position in which we find ourselves, in respect that we do not know the view of the Government. I do not come to any conclusion on that point at this moment. We are but vaguely aware of what the nature of this appointment is to be, and of the whole question of what power should be given to the occupant of that position. The whole question turns upon the nature of his position. Now, there are two or three different theories. First of all, there is the idea, which I confess at first I gathered from the statement of the right hon. Gentleman, that this was to be a Member of the House who was to be authorised, in the case of the necessary absence of the Chairman, to take his place, and to be authorised further if the Speaker also was absent to fill the chair and act as Deputy Speaker. That would be a contingency that would very rarely occur. It has I believe never happened, at least for many years, that the Speaker and Chairman have been disabled at the same time, but if this is a contingency which might occur—and we see that we have been perilously near it—it is right to provide for it. Another theory is that he is to be a new officer of the House, who may interchange duties as he likes, or as may be arranged between them, either with the Speaker or the Chairman. That is a much more formidable position.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

In the unavoidable absence of the Chairman.

Sir H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN

In the unavoidable absence of the Chairman! Then the first theory is the right one; it has been opposed in the House in one or two speeches. There is the third idea that he is to bean absolute duplicate of the Chairman of Ways and Means, and is to take a large part in the private business of the House which is transacted in the earlier part of the day. In the first case I think he ought to be a paid official, just as the Chairman of Ways and Means, and in that case also it would be less objectionable to endow him with the extreme powers of the Speaker or the Chairman of Ways and Means. I think there would be great objection to give the full power sought to be conferred upon that officer of the House if he is not paid. The fact of being a salaried official of the House alters the position entirely. But then the hon. Gentleman says that if he is to be this duplicate Chairman of Ways and Means, and if he is to take his full share of the private business of the House, that is not a step we ought to take without full inquiry. We are to appoint for the eighth or ninth time a Committee on Private Business. Private Business is the particular business of the House which has been inquired into again and again, and I should have thought that at this time of day it was not necessary to have another Committee; but if we are to have that Committee its Report of course would determine the question whether the new assistant Chairman of Ways and Means was to have a salary, and was to have the full powers of which I have spoken. The House is quite unaware of what is to be the ultimate reading of this rule. When we come to the point now before us, whether the new official ought to have the power of granting the closure or of naming Members, it is difficult to say what answer we would give, because the answer would depend on the different solutions to which I have referred. My right hon. friend the Member for West Monmouthshire holds a strong opinion against the closure, founded largely on his own experience. Although I cannot go his full length, I have considerable sympathy with what he said. My right hon. friend passed the most intricate Budget of this generation without once using it, and there must be something amiable and prepossessing in the character of a Chancellor of the Exchequer, because the present Chancellor of the Exchequer was able last year to perform precisely the same feat. No doubt that fact colours the view of my right hon. friend, but I agree with him as to the extraordinary lengths to which the closure has been carried in recent years. Last session the closure came almost to be a necessary precursor of every division. There was first the closure, and immediately on it the main Question, and the voting on the closure does not in the least turn on whether the closure was rightly or wrongly applied, but was a mere anticipation—I will not say a repetition—of the division on the main Question. I think that this was never intended, nor was it a creditable or useful employment of this weapon. But it is evident that if the House is to have a Deputy Chairman to sit in the chair he must have the power of the closure, and, still more, have the power of naming Members already possessed by occasional Chairmen. The whole question turns upon the precise nature of the appointment with which the House is dealing, and as to this I confess that I am entirely in the dark at the present moment.

(11.8.) MR. T. P. O'CONNOR (Liverpool, Scotland)

said he thought that these rules should have been a little more thought out than had been apparent from the statement of the First Lord of the Treasury. He asked whether the Government had considered how these rules would work if there was a different Party in power than at present. He himself found the rules rather ambiguous. As he understood the speech of the First Lord, this particular rule was intended to meet the case where both the Speaker and the Chairman of Ways and Means were ill at the same time. At present when it was reported that the Speaker and the Chairman cannot be in their places, a Member out of a panel of four or five was put in the place of the Chairman of Ways and Means. That arrangement had some drawbacks but also some virtues. The panel was taken from all parts of the House, and all sections were represented on it. That was an arrangement which was quite in accordance with the practice of all the legislatures on the Continent and in America. But what did the First Lord of the Treasury propose to substitute for that panel? The new Deputy Chairman was to be chosen by the Government itself, and, according to the precedent hitherto followed, the Party in power would nominate and elect a Member of their own party, who would go out of office when his Party also went out of office. In other words, the new Deputy Chairman was to be drawn from one Party in the House alone, and was to be a political partisan. He put it to the House whether it was not most dangerous to in trust to a political partisan the power of closure and of naming and of suspending Members. It was quite true that some inconvenience had arisen from the Chairman, under the panel system, not having the power of closure, but the corresponding advantage of having a panel drawn from all sections of the House outweighed the inconvenience. He thought that an abundant case had been made out against arming this casual Chairman, this political partisan, with all the powers of the Speaker and of the Chairman of Ways and Means; and he

warned hon. Gentlemen opposite that if this rule were carried, as proposed by the First Lord, they would find some day those powers would be used very much to their disadvantage.

(11.12.) Question put.

The House divided:—Ayes, 122; Noes, 242. (Division List, No. 20.)

AYES.
Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.)	Hammond, John	O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)
Allan, William (Gateshead)	Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Sir William	O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.)
Ambrose, Robert	Harwood, George	O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)
Ashton, Thomas Gair	Hayden, John Patrick	O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)
Atherley-Jones, L.	Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.	O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)
Austin, Sir John	Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.	O'Dowd, John
Barry, E. (Cork, S.)	Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.)	O'Kelly, Jas. (Roscommon, N.)
Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)	Joicey, Sir James	O'Malley, William
Bell, Richard	Jones, Dav. Brynmor (Swansea)	O'Shaughnessy, P. J.
Blake, Edward	Jordan, Jeremiah	O'Shee, James John
Boland, John	Joyce, Michael	Pirie, Duncan V.
Brigg, John	Kearley, Hudson E.	Power, Patrick Joseph
Broadhurst, Henry	Kinloch, Sir John Geo. Smyth	Price, Robert John
Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson	Kitson, Sir James	Reddy, M.
Bryce, Rt. Hon. James	Labouchere, Henry	Redmond, John E. (Waterford)
Burns, John	Langley, Batty	Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)
Caine, William Sproston	Layland-Barratt, Francis	Robson, William Snowdon
Caldwell, James	Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington)	Roche, John
Cameron, Robert	Levy, Maurice	Runciman, Walter
Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton	Lewis, John Herbert	Russell, T. W.
Cawley, Frederick	Lloyd-George, David	Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)
Channing, Francis Allston	Lough, Thomas	Schwann, Charles E.
Clancy, John Joseph	Lundon, W.	Sheehan, Daniel Daniel
Cogan, Denis J.	MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.	Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)
Condon, Thomas Joseph	MacNamara, Dr. Thomas J.	Soares, Ernest J.
Crean, Eugene	MacNeill, John Gordon Swift	Sullivan, Donal
Cremer, William Randal	M'Fadden, Edward	Thomas, J A (Glam'rgan, G'wer)
Cullinan, J.	M'Hugh, Patrick A.	Tomkinson, James
Dalziel, James Henry	McKenna, Reginald	Trevelyan, Charles Philips
Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)	M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)	Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)
Delany, William	Mooney, John J.	White, Luke (York, E. R.)
Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles	Morley, Charles (Breconshire)	White, Patrick (Meath, North)
Dillon, John	Morton, Edwd. J. C. (D'vonport)	Whittaker, Thomas Palmer
Doogan, P. C.	Moss, Samuel	Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)
Edwards, Frank	Murphy, John	Wilson, Fred. W (Norf'lk, Mid.)
Farrell, James Patrick	Nannetti, Joseph P.	Wilson, Henry J. (York, W. R.)
Ffrench, Peter	Nolan, Col. John P.(Galway, N.)	Woodhouse, Sir J T (Hu'dersf'd.)
Field, William	Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)	Yoxall, James Henry
Flynn, James Christopher	Norton, Capt. Cecil William
Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)	O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)	TELLERS FOR THE AYES—
Gilhooly, James	O'Brien, Kendal(Ti'per'ryMid.)	Sir Thomas Esmonde and
Goddard, Daniel Ford	O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)	Captain Donelan.
NOES.
Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir A. F.	Anson, Sir William Reynell	Asher, Alexander
Agg-Gardner, James Tynte	Archdale, Edward Mervyn	Asquith, Rt. Hon. H. H.
Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel	Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.	Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John
Bailey, James (Walworth)	Flannery, Sir Fortescue	Maxwell, Rt Hn Sir H. E. (Wigt'n
Bain, Col. James Robert	Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir H.	Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriesh.
Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r	Flower, Ernest	Mildmay, Francis Bingham
Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds	Foster, Sir M. (Lond. Univ.)	Milner, Rt. Hon. Sir F. G.
Banbury, Frederick George	Foster, P. S. (Warwick, S. W.)	Milvain, Thomas
Barry, Sir F. T. (Windsor)	Galloway, William Johnson	Mitchell, William
Bartley, George C. T.	Gardner, Ernest	Molesworth, Sir Lewis
Beach, Rt. Hon. Sir M. H.	Garfit, William	More, R. J. (Shropshire)
Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.	Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)	Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow
Bentinck, Lord Henry C.	Gladstone, Rt. Hon. H. J.	Morrison, James Archibald
Bignold, Arthur	Godson, Sir Augustus F.	Moreton, A. H. A. (Deptford)
Bigwood, James	Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn	Moulton, John Fletcher
Blundell, Col. Henry	Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.)	Muntz, Philip A.
Bond, Edward	Gordon, Maj. E.) T'r Hamlets	Murray, Rt. Hon. A. G. (Bute
Boscawen, Arthur Griffith	Gore, Hon. S. F. O. (Linc.)	Newnes, Sir George
Bousfield, William Robert	Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. E.	Nicholson, William Graham
Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John	Goulding, Edward Alfred	Nicol, Donald Ninian
Brymer, William Ernest	Gray, Ernest (West Ham)	Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)
Bull, William James	Green, W. D. (Wednesbury)	Paulton, James Mellor
Bullard, Sir Harry	Greene, Sir E W. (B'rySt Edm'ds	Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)
Butcher, John George	Gretton, John	Peel, Hn. Wm. Robt. Wellesley
Carlile, William Walter	Grey, Sir E. (Berwick)	Penn, John
Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir E. H.	Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton	Percy, Earl
Cautley, Henry Strother	Guthrie, Walter Murray	Pilkington, Lieut,. Col. Richard
Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs.)	Halsey, Thomas Frederick	Platt-Higgins, Frederick
Cavendish, V. C. W. (Dby'shire	Hamilton, Rt Hn. Lord G. (Mid'x	Plummer, Walter R.
Cecil, Evelyn (Ashton Manor)	Hamilton, Marq. of(L'nd'derry	Powell, Sir Francis Sharp
Cecil, Lord H. (Greenwich)	Hardy, L. (Kent, Ashford)	Pretyman, Ernest George
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.	Hare, Thomas Leigh	Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward
Chamberlain, J. A (Worc'r)	Haslam, Sir Alfred S.	Pyme, C. Guy
Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry	Hay, Hon. Claude George	Rankin, Sir James
Chapman, Edward	Heath, A. H. (Hanley)	Rasch, Major Frederic Carne
Churchill, Winston Spencer	Heath, J. (Staffords, N. W.	Renshaw, Charles Bine
Clare, Octavius Leigh	Helder, Augustus	Ridley, S. F. (Bethnal Green)
Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.	Henderson, Alexander	Ritchie, Rt. Hon. C. Thomson
Cohen, Benjamin Louis	Hoare, Sir Samuel	Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)
Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse	Hogg, Lindsay	Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)
Colomb, Sir John C. R.	Holland, William Henry	Rolleston, Sir John F. L.
Colston, C. E. H. A.	Hope, J. F. (S'field, Brightside	Rothschild, Hon. Lionel W.
Compton, Lord Alwyne	Hornby, Sir William Henry	Royds, Clement Molyneux
Corbett, A. C. (Glasgow)	Houldsworth, Sir W. H.	Rutherford, John
Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)	Hoult, Joseph	Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-
Cranborne, Viscount	Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham	Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)
Cross, S. H. (Bolton)	Hudson, George Bickersteth	Saunderson, Rt. Hon. Col. E. J.
Crossley, Sir Savile	Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick	Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)
Cubitt, Hon. Henry	Jessel, Capt. Herbert M.	Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)
Dalkeith, Earl of	Johnston, William (Belfast)	Seely, Capt. J. E. B. (I. of Wight
Dalrymple, Sir Charles	Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H.	Seton-Karr, Henry
Davies, M. V. (Cardigan)	Kenyon, Hon. G. T. (Denbigh)	Sharpe, William Edward T.
Denny, Colonel	Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.	Shaw Stewart, M. H. (Renfrew
Dewar, J. A. (Inverness-sh.)	Keswick, William	Simeon, Sir Barrington
Dickinson, Robert Edmund	Knowles, Less	Skewes-Cox, Thomas
Dickson, Charles Scott	Lawrence, W. F. (Liverpool)	Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)
Digby, J. K. D. Wingfield	Lawson, John Grant	Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.
Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph	Lee, A. H. (Hants., Fareham	Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk
Dorington, Sir John Edward	Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage	Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)
Doughty, George	Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie	Stewart, Sir M. J. M'Taggart
Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-	Leveson-Gower, F. N. S.	Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.
Duke, Henry Edward	Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.	Stock, James Henry
Durning-Lawrence, Sir E.	Loder, Gerald W. E.	Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley
Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton	Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)	Sturt, Hon. Humphrey Napier
Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph D.	Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Bristol, S.	Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)
Emmott, Alfred	Lonsdale, John Browlee	Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Oxf'd Uni.)
Faber, E. B. (Hants, W.)	Lowe, Francis William	Thomas, David Alf. (Merthyr)
Fardell, Sir T. George	Loyd, Archie Kirkman	Thorburn, Sir Walter
Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn E.	Lucas, Col. F. (Lowestoft)	Tollemache, Henry James
Ferguson, R. C. M. (Leith)	Lucas, R. J. (Portsmonth)	Tomlinson, Wm. Edwd. Murray
Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r	Macartney, Rt. Hon. W. G. E.	Tritton, Charles Ernest
Fielden, Edward B.	Macdona, John Cumming	Valentia, Viscount
Finch, George H.	McCalmont, Col. H. L. B. (Cambs	Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)
Finlay, Sir Robert B.	McCalmont, Col. J. (Antrim, E.	Walker, Col. William Hall
Fisher, William Hayes	Majendie, James A. H.	Wallace, Robert
EitzGerald, Sir Robert P.	Manners, Lord Cecil	Warr, Augustus Frederick
Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A.	Martin, Richard Biddulph	Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney

Webb, Col. William George	Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks)	Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong
Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon-	Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)
Whitley, H (Ashton-und-Lyne	Wortely, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-	TELLERS FOR THE NOES—
Wilson, A. Stanley (Yourk, E. R.)	Wylie, Alexander	Sir William Walrond and
Wilson, John (Glasgow)	Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George	Mr. Anstruther.

(11.25.) MR. SWIFT MACNEILL

said he desired to move at the end of the Amendment of the First Lord of the Treasury an Amendment which he thought the right hon. Gentleman would accept. It was— Provided always that all Motions specifically framed for the purpose of impugning the decisions of the Deputy Chairman in the Conduct and discharge of the duties of his office as Deputy Chairman shall take precedence of the Orders of the day. The right hon. Gentleman would see that he had exercised some discretion in framing the Amendment. If he had framed the Amendment on the Rule as constituted at present, he would have said that all Motions impugning the conduct of the Deputy Chairman should be matters of privilege. He could not do that, as the right hon. Gentleman had taken privilege into his power and made them all dependent on his will and pleasure. He said that the right hon. Gentleman was the enemy of privilege, quite unconciously though it might be. He had the greatest possible admiration for the right hon. Gentleman, and therefore he would appeal to him without the smallest difficulty. There were certain matters absolutely taken out of the cognisance of the House. For instance, the rule was distinct and decisive that hon. Members could not I review a decision of the Speaker or of the Chairman of Committees except by specific Motion. The Rule was framed with the idea of giving the high officials of the House due notice, and it was provided that in such cases a specific Motion should be made and placed before the House. When the Rule was made it was never even dreamt of that when an hon. Member proposed such a Motion he would be obstructed by the Government. But hon. Members did not now get the opportunity, as the Government took all the time of the House. Therefore when a new official, without Mr. Speaker's power, responsibility and great weight, a mere puppet of the Ministry, was to be appointed, he would ask the First Lord of the Treasury when the conduct of that official was impugned that they should have an opportunity of bringing it before the House. If that pledge were not given, disorder was certain to occur. It was more than flesh and blood could stand, that hon. Members should be asked to submit calmly to the decisions of a mere puppet of the Ministry. He wished to direct the attention of the House to a matter on which he confessessed he felt very strongly at the time. It had reference to a decision of a Deputy Chairman. It gave him very great pain, but he was convinced he was right and that the Deputy Chairman was wrong. He did not impugn his motives, but he was as certain as he was of his own existence that the decision was wrong. On the 26th of July, 1901, he asked Mr. Speaker the following question:— I desire to put a question to you Mr Speaker as bearing upon the protection of the rights and privileges of Members. I am aware that you are unable to take cognizance of what takes place in Committee of Supply, but will you say if there is any method of challenging a ruling of the Deputy Chairman given last night, and which appears to have been contrary to practice and calculated to unduly shield ministers from criticism. Could or should a ruling be challenged in any other way than by motion? Mr. Speaker: "I am not aware of any other method." Then I said "I beg to give notice of a Motion in the following terms:—That this House disagrees in the ruling of Mr Stuart Wortley as Deputy Chairman man on Thursday that criticism of the manner and method of response by the Secretary of State for War to questions addressed to him in reference to matters in his department are out of order in discussion in Committee of Supply on a motion for the reduction on Secretary of States's salary is as much as it is subversive of free discussion, contrary to practice and a grave infringement of the rights of members. It was a scandal to allow a Motion of that kind to remain on the Paper without either ordering it to be discharged, or giving him an opportunity of proving it. He adhered to every word he had said. He only wished to show the House and the country what might happen in the case of a Deputy Chairman against whose decision there could be no appeal, however perverse his ruling might be.

* Mr. SPEAKER

The hon. Member is not entitled to speak of the ruling to which he refers as perverse.

MR. SWIFT MACNEILL

said he would not persist in it. He recollected very well reading a passage in one of Burke's speeches in which he criticised the decision of a Chairman in such terms as he would not apply for a moment to any Chairman for whom he had a shadow of respect. The rule which prevented the conduct of the Speaker or Chairman being impugned, except in a specified way, was never passed in order that it should be administered as the right hon. Gentleman now proposed to administer it, and having regard to the curious and anomalous powers to be conferred on the Deputy Chairman, he would press his Motion to a division. He would ask the right hon. Gentleman to have some respect for the privileges of Parliament, and not to enable a partisan of his own to occupy a position of absolutely despotic power.

Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment, as amended— In line 6, at the end, to add the words,—'Provided always that all Motions specifically framed for the purpose of impugning the decisions of the Deputy Chairman or his conduct in the discharge of his duties as Deputy Chairman shall take precedence of the Orders of the Day' "—(Mr. Swift MacNeill.)

Question proposed "That those words be there added."

(11.38.) MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I am sure the hon. Gentleman, in spite of his persuasive tongue, does not anticipate that I will agree with him. My right hon. friend the Member for the Sleaford Division accused me a few minutes ago of having used a phrase which led him to suppose that I had no desire by these rules to check undue obstruction. I do not say I am altogether innocent of having used some such expression; but if I assented to the hon. Gentleman's Amendment I should simply be encouraging the House, every time the Deputy Chairman was in the Chair, to spend hours the next day in discussing, not the business on the Order Paper, but the merits or demerits of the rulings of this official. I cannot think that would be desirable. I see no reason why he should be treated differently from Mr. Speaker and the Chairman; and when we give the same powers we ought also to give him the same immunity.

MR. FLYNN (Cork, N.)

said no one could contend that Motions would be brought forward day after day, after the Deputy Chairman had been in the Chair. To his mind the Amendment was a rational and most obvious precaution, which the House ought to take for its own protection against the possible ignorance and inexperience of the Deputy Chairman. Were they to assume that the nomination of the Government conferred on an unknown and possibly untried Member of the House great experience and great knowledge of detail with regard to the proceedings of the House and the conduct of business? They knew that any Member, no matter how great his capacity might be, who was put to a set of duties in which he had no previous experience was liable to make great mistakes indeed, and if some such protection as that afforded by the Amendment were not given, they might have a state of things in which one Member would be presiding over Members much more experienced than he was. He had often himself seen Chairmen of Committees sorely puzzled as to how to decide questions of order. Mr. Speaker gave a close study to the Rules, the Standing Orders and the general Procedure of the House, and was an acknowledged authority. The present Chairman of Committees had also long experience and knew how to conduct the business of the House Questions of a difficult and complicated character frequently arose in Committee of Supply, and they required a man of great experience, much knowledge, and considerable tact to deal with them. He had known a Chairman, simply because he lacked that tact, to embark the House on a scene of turmoil and disorder. It was impossible for a man suddenly to divest himself of all Party prejudice and political feeling, and therefore he hoped that the Government, if they could not accept his hon. friend's Amendment, would at any rate bring forward some form of words that would give protection to ordinary Members of the House.

(11.48.) MR. DALZIEL

did not believe there was any advantage to be obtained, as a rule, from reviewing decisions given in Committee. Every Chairman of Committees was liable to make mistakes, and, probably, in the heat of party debate did make mistakes. He desired to support the Amendment for an entirely different reason. The House was bound to stand by the Chairman of Committees, but there was this difference with regard to the question under discussion. Powers were to be given to a gentleman about whose particular office the House were entirely in the dark. They were to have a Committee to define those powers. Until he knew exactly the power this gentleman was to have he should do all he could to limit the authority conferred upon him by the House. This gentleman would not be a permanent official of the House; he would be a keen party man, at the call of the Government. Suppose a Radical Government came into office with a big majority, and they brought forward a far-reaching measure of reform, such as hon. Gentlemen on the other side would call a Revolutionary Measure. That Government would desire to carry their Bill, and they would say they had been returned by the country to place it on the Statute Book. What sort of man would they look out for? A stalwart, of course; he would be a keen Party man. He assumed that no man would be appointed to the post whose conduct had not been characterised by fairness and impartiality, but circumstances might very easily arise in which it would be said that that gentleman had given decisions contrary to the rules of the House, and he had shortened debate, or denied the full opportunity to Members of coming to a rational decision. What sort of appeal would the Conservative Opposition have against such decisions? None at all. They would have to ballot for a Motion, and then, if they were successful, the Radical Government would probably take the day they had secured. The Deputy Chairman was on an altogether different plane from the Speaker and the Chairman of Ways and Means. The appointment was purely an experiment, and, until the experiment had been tried and a Committee had given the House the benefit of its investigations and knowledge, the Gentleman should be, as it were, on his trial. He hid not think the power proposed by the Amendment would be abused, but, in the event of its being accepted, he should move a further Amendment, making it necessary for such a Motion to be supported by a certain number of Members before it could be brought forward.

11.53.) Question put.

The House divided—Ayes 72; Noes, 250. (Division List, No. 21),

AYES.
Abraham, Wm. (Cork, N. E.)	Hammond, John	O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)
Ambrose, Robert	Hayden, John Patrick	O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)
Barry, E. (Cork, S.)	Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.)	O'Dowd, John
Bell, Richard	Jordan, Jeremiah	O'Kelly, Jas. (Roscommon, N.)
Blake, Edward	Joyce, Michael	O'Malley, William
Boland, John	Levy, Maurice	O'Shaughnessy, P. J.
Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson	Lewis, John Herbert	O'Shee, James John
Caine, William Sproston	Lundon, W.	Power, Patrick Joseph
Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton	MacDonnell, Dr Mark A.	Reddy, M.
Clancy, John Joseph	MacNeill, John Gordon Swift	Redmond, John E. (Waterford)
Cogan, Denis J.	M'Fadden, Edward	Roche, John
Condon, Thomas Joseph	M'Hugh, Patrick A.	Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)
Crean, Eugene	M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)	Sheehan, Daniel Daniel
Cremer, William Randal	Mooney, John J.	Sullivan, Donal
Culliuan, J.	Morton, Edwd. J. C. (D'vonport)	Thomas, J A.(Gl'm'rg'n, Gower)
Delany, William	Moss, Samuel	Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)
Dillon, John	Murphy, John	White, George (Norfolk)
Doogan, P. C.	Nannetti, Joseph P.	White, Patrick (Meath, North)
Edwards, Frank	Nolan, Col. John P.(Galway, N.)	Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)
Esmonde, Sir Thomas	Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)	Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.)
Farrell, James Patrick	O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)
Ffrench, Peter	O'Brien, Kend. (Ti'per'ry, Mid.)	TELLERS FOR THE AYES—
Field, William	O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)	Mr Dalziel and Captain Donelan.
Flynn, James Christopher	O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)
Gilhooly, James	O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.)
Goddard, Daniel Ford	O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

NOES.
Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F.	Cawley, Frederick	Fardell, Sir T. George
Agg-Gardner, James Tynte	Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)	Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward
Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel	Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)	Fergusson, Rt. Hon. Sir J (Man'r.
Allan, William (Gateshead)	Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.)	Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst
Archdale, Edward Mervyn	Chamberlain, J. Aust'n (Worc'r.	Finch, George H.
Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.	Channing, Francis Allston	Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne
Asher, Alexander	Chapman, Edward	Fisher, William Hayes
Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John	Churchill, Winston Spencer	FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-
Bailey, James (Walworth)	Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H.A.E.	Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon
Bain, Colonel James Robert	Cohen, Benjamin Louis	Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r.)	Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse	Foster, Phil. S. (Warwick, S. W.)
Balfour, Rt. Hon. Ger. W(Leeds)	Colomb, Sir John Chas. Ready	Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)
Banbury, Frederick George	Compton, Lord Alwyne	Galloway, William Johnson
Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor)	Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)	Gardner, Ernest
Bartley, George C. T.	Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)	Garfit, William
Beach, Rt. Hon. Sir Mich. Hicks	Craig, Robert Hunter	Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)
Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.	Cranborne, Viscount	Gladstone, Rt. Hon. Herb. John
Bentinck, Lord Henry C.	Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)	Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick
Bignold, Arthur	Crossley, Sir Savile	Gordon, Hon. J. E. (Elgin&Nairn
Blundell, Colonel Henry	Cubitt, Hon. Henry	Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.)
Bond, Edward	Dalkeith, Earl of	Gordon, Maj. Evans-(T'rH'ml'ts
Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-	Dalrymple, Sir Charles	Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby-(Linc.)
Bousfield, William Robert	Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)	Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon
Brigg, John	Denny, Colonel	Goulding, Edward Alfred
Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St John	Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.)	Gray, Ernest (West Ham)
Bryce, Rt. Hon. James	Dickson, Charles Scott	Green, Walf'rdD. (Wednesbury
Brymer, William Ernest	Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-	Greene, Sir E. W (B'ry SEdm'nds
Bull, William James	Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph	Gretton, John
Bullard, Sir Harry	Dorington, Sir John Edward	Greville, Hon. Ronald
Butcher, John George	Doughty, George	Grey, Sir Edward (Berwick)
Caldwell, James	Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-	Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton
Carlile, William Walter	Duke, Henry Edward	Guthrie, Walter Murray
Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edwd. H.	Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin	Halsey, Thomas Frederick
Cautley, Henry Struther	Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton	Hamilton, Rt Hon Lord G(Mid'x
Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs.)	Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas	Hamilton, Marq. of(L'nd'nde'ry
Cavendish, V. C. W (Derbyshire)	Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)	Hardy, Laur'nce (Kent, Ashford

Hare, Thomas Leigh	Martin, Richard Biddulph	Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert
Haslam, Sir Alfred S.	Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W.F.	Saunderson, Rt. Hon. Col. E. J.
Hay, Hon. Claude George	Maxwell, Rt Hn Sir H. E. (Wit's	Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)
Heath, Arthur Howard(Hanley	Maxwell, W.J.H. (Dumfriesh.)	Seely, Chas. Hilton (Lincoln)
Heath, James (Staffords. N. W.)	Mildmay, Francis Bingham	Seely, Capt. J. E. B. (I. of Wight
Helder, Augustus	Milner, Rt. Hon. Sir Fredk. G.	Seton-Karr, Henry
Hoare, Sir Samuel	Milvain, Thomas	Sharpe, William Edward T.
Hogg, Lindsay	Mitchell, William	Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)
Holland, William Henry	Molesworth, Sir Lewis	Smith, H. C. (North'mbTynesi'e
Hope, J. F (Sheffield, Brightside	Moon, Edward Robert Pacy	Smith, Jas. Parker (Lanarks.)
Hornby, Sir William Henry	More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire	Soares, Ernest J.
Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry	Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)	Stanley, Hon. Arth. (Ormskirk
Hoult, Joseph	Morley, Chas. (Breconshire)	Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)
Howard, Jno. (Kent, F'versham)	Morrison, James Archibald	Stewart, Sir M. J. M'Taggart
Hudson, George Bickersteth	Moulton, John Fletcher	Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.
Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick	Muntz, Philip A.	Stock, James Henry
Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton	Murray, Rt. Hon. A. G. (Bute	Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley
Johnston, William (Belfast)	Nicholson, William Graham	Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier
Joicey, Sir James	Nicol, Donald Ninian	Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)
Kearley, Hudson E.	Palmer, Walter (Salisbnry)	Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Oxf'd Uni.)
Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T.(Denbigh)	Paulton, James Mellor	Thomas, David Alf. (Merthyr)
Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.)	Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)	Tollemache, Henry James
Keswick, William	Peel, Hon. W. R. W.	Tomkinson, James
Knowles, Lees	Penn, John	Tomlinson, Wm. Edwd. Murray
Lawrence, Joseph (Monmouth)	Percy, Earl	Trevelyan, Charles Philips
Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)	Pilkington, Lt.-Col. Richard	Valentia, Viscount
Lawson, John Grant	Pirie, Duncan V.	Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)
Layland-Barratt, Francis	Platt-Higgins, Frederick	Walker, Col. William Hall
Lee, Arth. H.(Hants., Fareham)	Plummer, Walter R.	Warr, Augustus Frederick
Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington	Powell, Sir Francis Sharp	Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney
Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage	Pretyman, Ernest George	Webb, Col. William George
Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie	Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward	Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon-
Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.	Pym, C. Guy	White, Luke (York E. R.)
Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.	Rankin, Sir James	Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne
Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine	Rasch, Major F. C.	Whitmore, Charles Algernon
Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham)	Renshaw, Charles Bine	Whittaker, Thomas Palmer
Long, Rt. Hon. Walt'r (Bristol,S	Ridley, S. F. (Bethnal Green	Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.)
Lonsdale, John Brownlee	Ritchie, Rt. Hon. C. T.	Wilson, Fred. W. (Norfolk, Mid.
Lowe, Francis William	Roberts, John H. (Denbigh)	Wilson, John (Glasgow)
Loyd, Archie Kirkman	Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)	Woodhouse, Sir J. T (Hu'dersf'd.
Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)	Robertson, H. (Hackney)	Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-
Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth	Robson, William Snowdon	Wylie, Alexander
Macartney, Rt. Hon. W. G. E.	Rolleston, Sir John F. L.	Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George
Macdona, John Cumming	Rothschild, Hon. Lionel W.	Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong
Maconochie, A. W.	Runciman, Walter
M'Calmont, Cl. H. L. B. (Cambs.	Russell, T. W.	TELLERS FOR THE NOES—
M'Calmont, Col. J. (Antrim, E.)	Rutherford, John	Sir William Walrond and
Majendie, James A. H.	Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-	Mr. Anstruther.
Manners, Lord Cecil	Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

Question proposed, "That the words 'At the commencement of every Parliament or from time to time, as necessity may arise, the House may appoint a Deputy Chairman, who shall, whenever the House is informed by the Clerk at the Table of the unavoidable absence of the Chairman of Ways and Means, be entitled to exercise all the powers vested in the Chairman of Ways and Means, including his powers as Deputy Speaker' be added at the end of the Standing Order:"

Debate arising; and, it being after Midnight, and objection being taken to further proceeding, the Debate stood adjourned.

Debate to be resumed To-morrow.

Adjourned at ten minutes after Twelve o'clock.