§ MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN (Worcestershire, E.)Why does not the right hon. Gentleman propose to take the Hops Bill to-night?
§ MR. ASQUITHIn consequence of the fact that, judging from the appearance of the Order Paper, it has developed into a controversial measure.
§ MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINCannot the right hon. Gentleman use his great influence with his followers to withdraw their opposition to the measure?
§ MR. LAURENCE HARDY (Kent, Ashford)asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he would consider the possibility of proceeding in Committee on the Hops Bill so far as Clause 1 was concerned, even though the second part of the Bill should be dropped in view of the opposition of which notice had been given.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEagreed it would be worth while saving that part of the Bill, but inquiry would have to be made to ascertain if that part would be non-contentious. The Prime Minister had said the Bill would not be proceeded with unless it could be considered as of a non-contentious character. If the clause could be so described then the Bill might be confined to that clause.
§ MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINThere appear to be nearly as many Amendments down to the Tuberculosis Prevention (Ireland) Bill which it is proposed to take.
§ MR. ASQUITHBut they are not of so menacing a character.