§ SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN (Stirling Burghs)Will the right hon. Gentleman say what the business will be on Monday?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURIf the Supplementary Army Estimates are not concluded to-night—and I really do not know what the prospects are—they will be the first Order on Monday. As regards the next business, there is a Motion down in the name of the hon. Member for Camborne for Tuesday, the 11th, which will under the rule which was passed yesterday be excluded from debate, supposing that, as is not only probable but certain, the discussion on the rules of procedure is not concluded by that time. I should not consider myself justified in making an exception in favour of any Member of this House, no matter what the resolution was, unless some public interest was affected by deferring such a discussion. But I am informed by my noble friend the Secretary of State for India that, in his 44 opinion, and in the opinion of the Viceroy, it is of the first importance that this subject should be discussed at no very distant date. In those circumstances I propose to put down after the Army Estimates some Motion which would raise the point raised by the hon. Member in his Motion. Exactly in what mode that should be done I have not yet determined, but it will be the subject which will come either first or immediately after the Army Estimates on Monday.
§ MR. CAINE (Cornwall, Camborne)I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his kindness. I do not care very much what form the Motion takes as long as the subject is raised. I do not desire to take a division, but only to have the matter discussed.
MR. GIBSON BOWLESHas the right hon. Gentleman decided upon the day on which the debate on the new rules shall begin? I may also ask if he proposes to take the rules in the order in which they stand on the Paper, or will he consider the desirability of first taking those that relate to the sittings of the House.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI think we ought to begin not later than Tuesday. By common agreement I think it will be admitted that the so-called Second Reading debate ought to conclude not later than next Friday, so that we may at once begin on the Amendments on Monday week. The House will have on the Order Paper immediately the Amendments the Government propose, and any Amendment Members propose to put down to those Amendments can be put down at once, unlike the procedure on a Bill, the Amendments to which cannot be put down until it has been read a second time. I hope our Amendments will be on the Order Paper on Monday, and I think we ought to begin on Tuesday, because I am aware that this is a subject on which a great many hon. Gentlemen probably have opinions to offer. It is not like the Second Reading debate on an ordinary Government Bill, as to which it may be naturally expected that the attacks upon it would be drawn from the other side of the House. In this case I hope the rules will not be attacked seriously from any 45 quarter, but doubtless they will be commented upon from all sides, and there must be a fair chance given not only to Gentlemen opposite but to Gentlemen on this side to offer their opinions. I think three days ought to be ample; I am not sure that two days would be ample, and therefore I propose to begin on Tuesday.
§ SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANI would beg the right hon. Gentleman to reconsider his decision. Until he used some expressions on the subject of a somewhat doubtful kind last night, at the end of the discussion, it was quite understood that this discussion would not begin until Thursday. I do not think the right hon. Gentleman will gain anything either in the attitude of the House towards the proposals, or in its disposition to discuss them in a businesslike way. I think the House is entitled to an opportunity of looking at these rules all round before we begin, and, therefore, I appeal to the right hon. Gentleman, on the ground of what was almost an understanding, that the debate should not begin till Thursday.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI wonder if I am wrong, or of too suspicious a nature, but I really believe the right hon. Gentleman is animated in his remarks by a suspicion that I wish to avoid the discussion of the Motion on Welsh Disestablishment, which is set down for Tuesday. I do not care one farthing whether that debate comes on or not. All I care for is that the Second Reading debate on these rules should end on Friday without leaving a sense of soreness in any part of the House with regard to the discussion. But I am quite ready to give way about the Tuesday so long as it is understood that hon. Members on this side are not expected to give up their rights of discussion.
§ SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT (Monmouthshire, W.)I certainly understood that the right hon. Gentleman gave a distinct understanding on this point. Members for Wales, unlike the right hon. Gentleman, do care, and care greatly, whether this debate comes on. They understood that Tuesday would be clear. As to the time for the Second Reading discussion of the rules, it does not require 46 entering into detail, and I think two days will be sufficient. I do not think there will be any disposition on this side of the House to shut out any criticism of his plans by the right hon. Gentleman's friends. Neither is there any desire on our part to treat his proposals in a hypercritical spirit. We are prepared to consider them on their merits.
§ MR. JOHN REDMOND (Waterford)I dare say the First Lord would like to gather opinions from all quarters. I should like to tell him that the Irish Members certainly do not entertain the idea that two days will be sufficient for the Second Reading discussion of these rules. We are anxious that the discussion should take place on Welsh Disestablishment, and I would therefore strongly urge the right hon. Gentleman to commence the debate on Thursday and make no attempt to finish it on Friday. Such a course would not impede the progress of the discussion, but would probably have the opposite effect.
§ MR. CHAPLIN (Lincolnshire, Sleaford)I did not understand that there was any pledge given by the right hon. Gentleman as to the day, but, at the same time, I desire to support the appeal made from the other side of the House.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURWhich appeal?
§ MR. CHAPLINThat the Second Reading debate should not be taken until Thursday. I think that appeal is made with good reason.
§ MR. ALFRED THOMAS (Glamorganshire, E.)The right hon. Gentleman says he wants to avoid causing any soreness. I can assure him that if he deprives them of Tuesday, the Welsh Members will feel very sore indeed.
§ * MR. SPEAKEROrder, order! There is no Question before the House.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI have no wish to press any hon. Members unduly. If I find on enquiry that two days is not thought to be a reasonable time, then I fear I must begin on the Tuesday. I 47 will state before the rising of the House when I propose to put down the rules. I am disposed to agree, personally, with the right hon. Gentleman behind me.
§ MR. CHAPLINI expressed no opinion on the point.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURWell, then, with the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Monmouthshire. I think with him, that two days should be sufficient, because what the House will have to deal with is a series of propositions, on each of which they will have a full opportunity, after the so-called Second Reading debate, of stating their views. That being the case, I think two days should be sufficient.
§ MR. JOHN REDMONDI think it is not quite fair to endeavour to squeeze hon. Members who consider two days insufficient by stating that if they persist in taking more time they will have to sacrifice Tuesday. It is not a fair weapon to use against us.
§ MR. A. J, BALFOURI do not wish to say anything to prolong this discussion, but may I just point out to the House that somebody must lose a day. If the day lost is not the Tuesday it must be a day at the end of the proceedings
§ MR. JOHN REDMONDTake the following Monday.