HC Deb 15 April 1907 vol 172 cc712-26

Order read, for resuming Adjourned Debate on Amendment [11th April] to Question [20th March]—"(1) When a Bill has been read a second time it shall stand committed to one of the Standing Committees, unless the House, on Motion to be decided without Amendment or debate, otherwise order, and such a Motion shall not require notice, must be made immediately after the Bill is read a second time, may be made by any Member, and may, though opposed, be decided after the expiration of the time for opposed business. But this Order shall not apply to—(a) Bills for imposing taxes, or Consolidated Fund or Appropriation Bills; or (b) Bills for confirming Provisional Orders. (2) The House may, on Motion made by the Member in charge of a Bill, commit the Bill to a Standing Committee in respect of some of its provisions, and to a Committee of the Whole House in respect of other provisions. If such a Motion is opposed the Speaker, after permitting, if he thinks fit, a brief explanatory statement from the Member who makes and from the Member who opposes the Motion, shall, without further debate, put the Question thereon."—(Sir H. Campbell-Bannerman.)

Which Amendment was— In line 10, at the end, to insert the words, '(c) Bills dealing with the organisation of the Army or Reserve Forces, or with the Navy.'"—(Sir F. Banbury.)

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


desired to ask the Prime Minister if he would inform the House of the principle upon which the Government had founded their proposed Standing Order. They had made particular exceptions. He excluded from the Bills automatically sent upstairs unless the House otherwise ordered on division Bills imposing taxes and certain small Bills. Bills imposing taxation was the important exception. The particular exception they were now asked to make was as to Bills in regard to the Army. He asked the Government why they thought it necessary to retain finance Bills in the House and to refuse to retain Army Bills. He shared the view of his right hon. friend the Leader of the Opposition that their financial procedure was unnecessarily cumbrous, and that a good deal of it was explicable by our past history. It had no practical reference to our present circumstances. The special jealousy with which the House regarded their financial Bills, and the special safeguards with which they had hedged about their passage, were really the outcome of the time when the House of Commons depended upon its power in two respects—in the first place, its power over money and grants to the Crown; and, in the second place, its power over the armed forces of the Crown. Any student of history would bear him out when he said that the House of Commons in those days regarded with equal jealousy any permanent grant of money to the Crown and any Bill authorising the Crown to maintain a land force or military disciplined force. In those days the jealousy of the House was maintained with regard to both the Army and finance. But the present Government maintained all the jealousy with regard to finance, but did not apply it to the Army. If he remembered aright the Army Bill in its preamble began by saying: "It is inexpedient to maintain and contrary to law," and that the powers should be only annual. They were ready to hedge about their financial system with safeguards; why should they be justified in abandoning the same safeguards in regard to military matters? He really asked the question with a desire for information. He had had, as it happened, to do with their financial procedure, though he had had little to do with the Army, except that for a short time he had to find the money to pay for it. He was quite at a loss to conceive any reason for retaining all the safeguards in regard to finance Bills, which did equally apply to Bills dealing with the Army. Therefore he desired to know what distinction the Government drew between the two. Bearing in mind that finance Bills of considerable importance might be brought in dealing with a considerable amount of details, it might be of great interest to future Chancellors of the Exchequer to know what determined the Government at the present time to preserve for finance Bills a series of restrictions which they did not think necessary in the case of any other Bills.


said he certainly thought that other people required some enlightenmentas well as the right hon. Gentleman opposite. He required some as to the view taken by the right hon. Gentleman and his friends. Now it appeared that they were doubtful whether there should be any particular sanctity in money Bills. Last week when they were discussing the Amendment of the hon. Member for Liverpool, the right hon. Gentleman thought that the Government's proposal for the safeguarding of money Bills was not strong enough. Now the Government were asked why they preserved these obsolete and out-of-date precautions.


That is not what I said. I asked the Government what was the logic of their distinction. I have logic of my own, but I cannot discover any logic in their proposal.


The right hon. Gentleman said a good deal more. He said that for his part he doubted whether these rules as to money Bills were necessary at all.






I spoke of Resolutions.


No, no; the right hon. Gentleman spoke of their treating them as if they were in a separate category altogether. That had always been done. That was the rule of the House. The Hartington Committee, in 1886, recommended— That every public Bill, after the Second Reading, except a Bill originating in Committee of Ways and Means, or a Bill for the Confirmation of any Provisional Order, unless the House shall otherwise order, shall be referred to a Standing Committee of the Whole House. Among the members of that Committee were Sir Michael Hicks-Beach, Mr. Bright, Mr. Chamberlain, Mr. Courtney, Sir William Harcourt, Mr. Healy, Mr. Justin McCarthy, Sir John Mowbray, Mr. Sexton, and Mr. W. H. Smith. It was a formidable list of names. Therefore, the Government also thought it was a reasonable thing to exempt these Bills. Now, it was asked, why not make a similar exemption of Army Bills? He did not remember that, in the early seventies, when there was a great reform of the Army, the Army Bills were treated in an exceptional manner. He did not know any particular reason why such a Bill should not be sent to a Standing Committee, but if there were such a reason, the House could refuse to send the Bill upstairs. Every Bill must stand on its own footing, but there was no sufficient ground for saying that every measure connected with the Army must be exempt from the ordinary procedure adopted for other Bills. He had answered the questions put by the right hon Gentleman as fully as he could, and he did not think there was much force in the point he sought to make, that if money Bills were exempt Army Bills should be exempt as well.


said that the only reason given by the Prime Minister for drawing a distinction as to these Bills was that a similar line of distinction had been drawn by the Hartington Committee. But the Hartington Committee did not take any pains when they had the power to turn their Report into an actuality, and some of the most important recommendations of that Committee were being rejected by the Government. Nothing in the nature of a reason had been given by the Prime Minister as to why the distinction between money Bills and Army Bills had been drawn, and what the Opposition pressed for was a reason for the plan of the Government. Surely that was not a very strange request. The Opposition denied the proposition that the distinction should be made because money Bills were important and other Bills were not. But it was not on the point of importance that the exception was made. Could it be on the point of constitutional precedent? If that was the reason, then the sanctity which attached to money Bills also attached to Bills dealing with the forces of the Crown. If the Government contended that in regard to money Bills they were justified in putting them into this exceptional category, they had a right to ask what was the reason for this exception and why it should not include other very important matters, one of which they were now discussing, and another of which it would be their duty to discuss immediately. He appealed to every hon. Member who had heard the Prime Minister's speech to say whether the right hon. Gentleman had given a single reason for the exception which he intended to introduce which did not apply with equal force to other measures. He would leave the House to judge whether there had been a complete reply, or any attempt to reply to the arguments which had been put forward by the Opposition.


said they had been told that they were wasting the time of the House in discussing such an Amendment as this. What they were trying to impress upon the Government was that in these revolutionary changes in the Rules of Procedure they should at least be consistent. If it was right to make an exception in the case of Bills imposing taxation, why was it not equally right that exceptions

should be made in the case of Bills dealing with the forces of the Crown? His hon. friends had pointed out that these two classes of Bills had almost equal historic sanction. They knew how jealous the House had always been with regard to its powers over the finances of the nation. They also knew that ever since there had been a Standing Army, as now understood in this country, the House had always exercised equal jealousy over its control of that force. Now the Government proposed to make a revolutionary change. They were sweeping away what the Prime Minister called archaic safeguards. If they made exceptions with regard to Bills dealing with the finances of the country, they ought also to make exceptions with regard to Bills dealing with the Standing Army, over the strength, finance, and discipline of which the House had always maintained a substantial and annual control.

Question put.

The House divided:—Ayes, 96; Noes, 301. (Division List No. 120.)

Acland-Hood, Rt. Hn Sir Alex, F. Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H
Anson, Sir William Reynell Courthope, G. Loyd Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hon. Col. W.
Arkwright, John Stanhope Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S. Lambton, Hon. Frederick W m.
Ashley, W. W. Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) Lane-Fox, G. R.
Balcarres, Lord Craik, Sir Henry Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)
Balfour, Rt Hn. A. J. (City Lond.) Cross, Alexander Lockwood, Rt. Hn. Lt.-Col. A. R.
Banner, John S. Harmood- Dalrymple, Viscount Lowe, Sir Francis William
Baring, Capt. Hn. G. (Winchester Doughty, Sir George MacIver, David (Liverpool)
Barrie, H.T. (Londonderry, N.) Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- Magnus, Sir Philip
Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks Duncan, Robert (Lanark, Govan Mason, James F. (Windsor)
Beckett, Hon. Gervase Faber, George Denison (York) Middlemore, John Throgmort'n
Bignold, Sir Arthur Faber, Capt. W. V. (Hants, W.) Mildmay, Francis Bingham
Bowles, G. Stewart Fell, Arthur Nield, Herbert
Boyle, Sir Edward Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey Powell, Sir Francis Sharp
Bridgeman, W. Clive Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. Randles, Sir John Scurrah
Butcher, Samuel Henry Forster, Henry William Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel
Campbell, Rt. Hon. J. H. M. Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East) Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Eeclesall)
Carlile, E. Hildred Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West) Rutherford, John (Lancashire)
Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. Haddock, George R. Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)
Cave, George Hamilton, Marquess of Salter, Arthur Clavell
Cavendish, Rt. Hon Victor C. W. Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.);
Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) Harrison-Broadley, Col. H. B. Sheffield, Sir Berkeley George D.
Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey- Hay, Hon. Claude George Sloan, Thomas Henry
Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.) Helmsley, Viscount Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)
Chamberlain, Rt Hn J. A. (Worc Hervey, F. W. F. (Bury S.Edm'ds
Coates, E. Feetham (Lewisham) Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury) Simth, F. E. (Liverpool, Walton
Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. Houston, Robert Paterson Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)
Collings, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm'gham) Hunt, Rowland Starkey, John R.
Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire) Younger, George
Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark Walrond, Hon. Lionel
Thornton, Percy M. Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid.) TELLERS FOR THE AYES—
Tuke, Sir John Batty Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.) Sir Frederick Banbury and
Turnour, Viscount Willoughby de Eres by, Lord Mr. Stanley Wilson.
Valentia, Viscount Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart
Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.) Collins, Sir W m. J. (S. Pancras, W. Helme, Norval Watson
Acland, Francis Dyke Condon, Thomas Joseph Henderson, J. M. (Aberdeen, W.)
Adkins, W. Ryland D. Cooper, G. J. Henry, Charles S.
Agnew, Geroge William Corbett, C H (Sussex, E. Grinst'd Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)
Ainsworth, John Stirling Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. Higham, John Sharp
Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch) Cory, Clifford John Hobart, Sir Robert
Ambrose, Robert Cowan, W. H. Hobhouse, Charles; E. H.
Armitage, R. Cox, Harold Hodge, John
Ashton, Thomas Gair Crean, Eugene Hogan, Michael
Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry Crombie, John William Holland, Sir William Henry
Astbury, John Meir Crossley, William J. Holt, Richard Durning
Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth) Dalmeny, Lord Hope, W. Bateman (Somerset, N
Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.) Dalziel, James Henry Horniman, Emslie John
Balfour, Robert, (Lanark) Davies, David (Montgomery Co. Horridge, Thomas Gardner
Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight) Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) Howard, Hon. Geoffrey
Barker, John Davies, Timothy (Fulham) Hudson, Walter
Barlow, Peicy (Bedford) Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.) Hutton, Alfred Eddison
Barnard, E. B. Delany, William Hyde, Clarendon
Barnes, G. N. Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.) Idris, T. H. W.
Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N. Dickinson, W. H. (St. Paneras, N. Illingworth, Percy H.
Beale, W. P. Duncan, C (Barrow-in-Furness) Isaacs, Rufus Daniel
Beauchamp, E. Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne) Jackson, R. S.
Beck, A. Cecil Edwards, Clement (Denbigh) Jenkins, J.
Bellairs, Carlyon Edwards, Enoch (Hanley) Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)
Benn, Sir JWilliams (Devonp'rt Edwards, Frank (Radnor) Jones, Sir D. Brynmor (Swansea
Benn, W. (T'w'r Hamlets, S. Geo. Elibank, Master of Jones, Leif (Appleby)
Bennett, E. N. Erskine, David C. Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)
Berridge, T. H. D. Essex, R. W. Joyce, Michael
Bertram, Julius Esslemont, George Birnie Kekewich, Sir George
Bethell, Sir J H (Essex, Romf'rd Evans, Samuel T. Kennedy, Vincent Paul
Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine Eve, Harry Trelawney Kincaid-Smith, Captain
Black, Arthur W. Everett, R. Lacey King, Alfred John (Knutsford)
Boland, John Fenwick, Charles Laidlaw, Robert
Brace, William Ferens, T. R. Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster
Bramsdon, T. A. Ferguson, R. C. Munro Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)
Brigg, John Ffrench, Peter Lambert, George
Bright, J. A. Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Lamont, Norman
Brocklehurst, W. B. Findlay, Alexander Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington
Brodie, H. C. Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry Lehmann, R. C.
Brunner, J. F. L. (Lancs., Leigh) Freeman-Thomas, Freeman Levy, Maurice
Bryce J. Annan Fuller, John Michael F. Lewis, John Herbert
Buckmaster, Stanley O. Fullerton, Hugh. Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David
Burke, E. Haviland- Gardner, Col. Alan (Hereford, S. Lough, Thomas
Burns, Rt. Hon. John Gladstone, Rt. Hn Herbert John Lundon, W.
Burnyeat, W. J. D. Glover, Thomas Luttrell, Hugh Fownes
Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas Greenwood, G. (Peterborough) Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk B'ghs
Buxton, Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward Mackarness, Frederic C.
Byles, William Pollard Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S
Cameron, Robert Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton MacVeigh, Charles Donegal, E.
Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H. Gwynn, Stephen Lucius M'Callum, John M.
Carr-Gomm, H. W. Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B. M'Crae, George
Causton, Rt Hn Richard Knight Hall, Frederick M'Kenna Rt. Hon. Reginald
Cawley, Sir Frederick Halpin, J. M'Killop, W.
Chance, Frederick William Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r) M'Micking, Major G.
Cheetham, John Frederick Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithn'ss-s. Maddison, Frederick
Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R. Harrington, Timothy Mallet, Charles E.
Clarke, C. Goddard Hart-Davies, T. Manfield, Harry (Northants)
Cleland, J. W. Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) Mansfield, H. Rendall (Lincoln
Clough William Harwood, George Marks, G. Croydon (Launceston)
Clynes, J, R. Haworth, Arthur A. Marnham, F. J.
Cobbold, Felix Thornley Hazel Dr. A. E. Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)
Massie, J. Rickett, J. Compton Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)
Meagher, Michael Ridsdale, E. A. Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr
Menzies, Walter Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) Thomasson, Franklin
Micklem, Nathaniel Roberts, G. H. (Norwich) Thompson, J. W. H. (Somerset)
Molteno, Percy Alport Roberts, John H. (Denbighs) Torrence, Sir A. M.
Money, L. G. Chiozza Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradf'rd Toulmin, George
Montagu, E. S. Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside) Ure, Alexander
Mooney, J. Robinson, S. Vivian, Henry
Morrell, Philip Robson, Sir William Snowdon Walsh, Stephen
Morton, Alpheus Cleophas Roe, Sir Thomas Walters, John Tudor
Myer, Horatio Rogers, F. E. Newman Walton, Sir John L. (Leeds, S.
Napier, T. B. Rose, Charles Day Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent)
Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw) Runciman, Walter Ward, W. Dudley (Southampton
Nicholls, George Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) Wardle, George J.
Nicholson, Chas. N. (Doncaster Scarisbrick, T. T. L. Waring, Walter
Nolan, Joseph Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde) Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)
Norton, Capt. Cecil William Schwann, Sir C. E. (Manchester) Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)
Nuttull, Harry Scott, A. H. (Ashtonunder Lyne Waterlow, S. D.
O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) Sears, J. E. Watt, Henry A.
O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) Shaw, Rt. Hon. T. (Hawick, B. Whitbread, Howard
O'Doherty, Philip Sherwell, Arthur James White, George (Norfolk)
O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth) Shipman, Dr. John G. Whites, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)
O'Grady, J. Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John White, Luke (York, E. R.)
O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie White, Patcick (Meath, North)
O'Malley, William Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.) Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)
O'Mara, James Snowdon, P. Wiles, Thomas
Parker, James (Halifax) Soames, Arthur Wellesley Wilkie, Alexander
Partington, Oswald Stanger, H Y. Williams, J. (Glamorgan)
Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek) Steadman, W. C. Williams, Llewelyn (Carmarth'n
Pearce, William (Limehouse) Stewart, Halley (Greenock) Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)
Philipps, Col. Ivor (S'thampton Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal) Wills, Arthur Walters
Pirie, Duncan V. Strachey, Sir Edward Wilson, Henry J. (York, W. R.)
Power, Patrick Joseeph Straus, B. S. (Mile End) Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)
Priestley, W. E. B. (Bradford, E. Summerbell, T. Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh, N.)
Rainy, A. Rolland Sutherland, J. E. Wilson, P. W. (St. Pancras, S.)
Raphael, Herbert Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth) Wood, T. M'Kinnon
Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro' Taylor, John W. (Durham)
Redmond, John E. (Waterford Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe TELLERS FOR THE NOES—
Redmond, William (Clare) Tennant, Sir Edward (Salisbury Mr. Whiteley and Mr. J. A.
Renton, Major Leslie Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire) Pease.
Richards, T. F. (Wolverh'mpt'n Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

Question put, and agreed to.

*MR. STUART WORTLEY (Sheffield, Hallam)

said he wished to move the exception of Bills to create a subordinate legislature in any part of the United Kingdom; Bills to give effect to treaties, conventions, or other international arrangements; and Bills to sanction the cession of any territory forming part of the dominions of the Crown. There were no reasons in favour of the exemption of finance Bills that would not equally apply to the three categories he had mentioned, and, not with standing any impatience the Prime Minister and his supporters might display, it was desirable that the Amendment should be moved in order that the Opposition might be able to mark their sense of the imperfections and reckless character of the Government Resolutions. Except by moving this Amendment the Opposition would have no way of getting a permanent record of their protest. As to the first category, Bills to create a subordinate legislature in any part of the United Kingdom, such Bills did not fall within the class of those which took away or modified the powers of this House. In all Home Rule Bills, there was invariably the Pharisaical claim that there was a complete reservation of the most absolute powers of the House. But if the Second Reading of such a Bill was assented to and it was sent upstairs to Grand Committee there would be no effective reservation at all. As to the second category, of Bills to give effect to treaties, conventions, or other international arrangements, right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite would, without such an exception, have sent the Sugar Convention Bill to a Grand Committee upstairs; and under the class of Bills which sanctioned the cession of any territory forming part of the dominions of the Crown, they would have sent to a Committee upstairs the Bill sanctioning the cession of the island of Heligoland to Germany. When the last named Bill was under discussion the late Mr. Gladstone delivered a most powerful address to the House in favour of the view that such matters should not be submitted to Parliament by Bill but if such subjects were to be dealt with by Parliament it ought to be by the House as a whole. He would remind the Prime Minister and those responsible for the new Standing Orders that none of them made it in any way compulsory to keep to be dealt within the House itself Bills which came within any one of the three classes he had mentioned. There would always be a power to submit the familiar Motion to send such Bills to a Committee upstairs unless an Amendment of this kind were agreed to. He begged to move.

Amendment proposed— In line 10, at end, to add '(c) Bills relating to the maintenance, organisation, or discipline of the Navy or the naval service; (d) Bills to create a subordinate legislature in any part of the United Kingdom; (e) Bills to give effect to treaties, conventions, or other international arrangements; (f) Bills to sanction the cession of any territory forming part of the dominions of the Crown.'"—(Mr. Stuart Worthy.)

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


said that the Prime Minister earlier in the evening had stated that, if the Opposition had taken the opportunity which was given to them on Thursday last of casting their eyes upon the various Amendments upon the Paper and selecting those which were most vital, this guillotine Motion would not have been necessary. Following that advice, he thought that the most vital Amendment was that which excluded from the consideration of the Grand Committees, Bills to create a subordinate legislature in any part of the United Kingdom. He looked with the greatest possible dread upon Bills of that character being taken away from the Committee of the Whole House. Of course he had in his mind the case of Ireland, and it was in view of the conflicting statements which had been made from time to time from the Treasury Bench that he had no doubt the Prime Minister and the Cabinet contemplated that a number of Bills of this character would be brought before the House for consideration. He believed, however, if it was the intention of the Prime Minister and his Government to lay the foundation stone of Home Rule for Ireland by introducing such a Bill and sending it upstairs to a Grand Committee, where those who were interested might or might not be represented in the proportion which they would like to see, they would inflict the gravest possible injury on the Committee work of the House. He had always endeavoured since he entered the House, however imperfectly, to voice the sentiments fairly and squarely of those who returned him, and if this proposal were carried a great deal of the power of representation and many of the privileges which one was supposed to enjoy would be taken away. If Bills of such tremendous purport and moment were permitted to go to a Grand Committee upstairs, where debate was not conducted in the same manner as in the House and where the light of day would not, so to speak, be admitted, hon. Members would not be able to realise as a whole what was being done and how it was being one. He was strengthened in that view by the fact that he learned from various Ministers that it was their intention to introduce legislation which closely affected the people of Ireland. The Prime Minister had stated that it was their intention to introduce very shortly a measure dealing with what he called "the better government of Ireland," or in other words "the association of the people of Ireland with the management of their affairs." If it was the intention of the Government to pass that Bill through without allowing hon. members a fair opportunity of discussing it, he thought it would be a crying shame. Such a policy must inevitably rebound on the heads of those Members of the Government who had engineered this method of dealing with business to the disadvantage of the minority in the House. He was glad, therefore, that the right hon. Gentleman had moved this particular Amendment which he claimed exhibited great common sense and reasonableness.

And, it being Eleven of the Clock, the Debate stood adjourned.

Debate to be resumed To-morrow.

Forward to