§ Five years shall be substituted for seven years as the time fixed for the maximum duration of Parliament under the Septennial Act, 1715.
§ Colonel GRIFFITH-BOSCAWENI beg to move to leave out the word "Five," and to insert instead thereof the word "Three."
The effect would be to set up triennial instead of quinquennial Parliaments. If we are to make any change we might as well come back to the old system which was in operation before the Septennial Act, and have triennial Parliaments. That was an old Tory arrangement which was upset by a Whig Government which had lost the confidence of the country. I confess I do not look forward hopefully to having elections every three years, but after the experience of last year it would be an improvement. I am proposing this Amendment because we have got to take this Bill as we find it. The Government have forced through by the "gag" and the guillotine the first., second, third, and fourth Clauses—
§ Colonel GRIFFITH-BOSCAWENI do not desire to reflect and I was merely stating facts, but I will bring my statement strictly in accordance with the facts. The Committee, at the instance of the Government, by means of the gag and the kangaroo Closure, have forced upon the Committee the Bill as it stands in Clauses 1, 2, 3, and 4, and what we have to do is to try and minimise the evil the Bill will do. I think the measure will do a great deal less harm to the country if we provide for three-year Parliaments instead of five years proposed by the Government. This is really a most reasonable Amendment. It does not in any way wreck the measure or destroy the purpose for which it was brought in. If there be any purpose for this Bill it is that only those measures shall be rushed through here and carried into law which have been directly and immediately before considered by the country, and which may therefore be supposed to have a special mandate. Under my Amendment that will still be possible. If Parliament sat for three years it would still be possible under this provision that in the first Session of a Parliament the particular measure which had been before the country at the last General Election 344 could be carried through this House. It could be carried in the second and third year, and at the end of the third year, two years elapsing between the Second Reading and the final carrying of the measure it could still become law. The effect of that would be to limit the operations under this Bill to measures which undoubtedly had been before the country at the last election, whereas, with the elbow room five years allows, it would be possible for the Government not only to carry measures which had undoubtedly been before the country, but to rush in a large number of other measures, and carry them into law without the intervention of the Second Chamber, although it could not be pretended they had been considered by the country at all. It would be possible for the Government to bring in a programme something like the Newcastle programme, and, having five years' elbow room, to rush beyond the House of Lords into law half-a-dozen measures at least, many of which had never been before the country at all. We all know that at a General Election it is almost impossible to get the people to concentrate their minds upon more than one or two problems at the outside. If one or two important problems were considered by the country, they could still be carried into law without the intervention of the Upper Chamber under my proposal, but it would prevent the Government carrying other measures which had really not been considered by the country. Therefore, I submit it is a most reasonable Amendment, and is one which does not in any way destroy the purpose of the Bill. I fully admit I make the Government a present of this—it would destroy the purpose of the Bill, so far as the present Parliament is concerned. Unless the Government, after passing this Bill, proceed in the present Session to pass Home Rule and Welsh Disestablishment; they could not get those proposals into law. For my part, I do not think the Government have any right whatever to attempt in the present Parliament, without the intervention of the Second Chamber, to carry either Home Rule or Welsh Disestablishment. It cannot be pretended the Government have ever made any attempt to prove those two most important constitutional questions were before the country at the last election. If any question was before the country, it was the question of this Bill. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] If you contend it was this 345 Bill, you cannot also say you have a mandate for Home Rule or Welsh Disestablishment. You cannot have it both ways, whereas the Government may fitly provide themselves with an instrument for carrying out the mandate of the people in the future, they have no right to use that instrument in the present Parliament. They could use it in the future, under my Amendment, but they could not use it in the present Parliament. For these reasons I throw it out as a proposal which I hope will commend itself to the Government that, if we deal with the duration of Parliaments at all, and I am not yet persuaded it is necessary to do so, we should at all events take the logical course of enacting it should be three years and not five years.
§ Mr. CHURCHILLThe Government cannot accept this Amendment—
§ Viscount HELMSLEYOn a point of Order. While not in the least hostile to this Amendment, I desire to ask whether it is in order in this form, because it appears to me the effect of it is undoubtedly to repeal the Act of 1715, which was itself an Act to repeal Triennial Parliaments. Therefore, if this Amendment were carried we should revert to the state of things which existed before the Act of 1715 was passed.
§ The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Emmott)It is just possible that may be the reason why the Clause is drawn in this form. I do not think substituting "three years" would repeal the Septennial Act, and it would not, therefore, have any effect upon the previous Act. I do not think it is out of order to move it in this form, but at any rate the question I put is, "That the word 'five' stand part of the Clause."
§ 11.0 P.M.
§ Mr. CHURCHILLThe Government cannot accept this Amendment. We agree that the question of the duration of Parliament is one about which opinions differ. We think five years is a good arrangement. We think it is a moderate arrangement, and that it occupies a convenient middle situation between the reactionary duration of a seven years' period and the revolutionary ardour of the hon. Gentleman who has just spoken and who, no doubt, in his dislike for this Bill would, if our discussions were indefinitely prolonged, reach the annual Parliaments which figured in the Chartist movement. We, as a Government or a party, cannot be reproached with any undue shrinking 346 from contact with the electorate, because during the last five years there have been, no fewer than three elections. Thus we are in advance of the system suggested, by the hon. Member. It is quite clear that the adoption of the three years' period would largely defeat the objects we have in view in passing this Bill. It would mean that only Bills passed in the present Session of Parliament, if resisted by the House of Lords, would become the law of the land. We have not the slightest intention of agreeing to anything which will destroy now or hereafter the full utility of the machinery we are now setting up in the lifetime of the present Parliament. Quite apart from that there is a strong objection to a reduction of the life of Parliament to three years. It would not be a good arrangement for the Government of the country; while it would put an undue strain upon Members of both sides of the House to force an election every three years.
I admit that the House of Lords by their action have done more than that. They have been able to force two appeals to the country in quick succession on a question which it is quite clear the opinion of the country is unalterable and fixed. We have only bowed to the force of circumstances, and it would be quite a different thing for the Government to appeal to the country at a particular moment, and for Parliament to fix a statutory period at which the appeal must take place. We agree that the statutory period is necessarily a maximum, and we think that the five years' period will be a good maximum in the future, and it is certainly a very great reduction of the period which has hitherto prevailed. Quite apart from the expense and work put upon Members by these recurring elections under an unreformed Elections Act, it is desirable that Parliament, when elected, should afford a broad and stable platform for the transaction of national affairs and for the careful and persistent pursuance of legislative projects, and we think that five years corrects the undue excess which has been previously committed, without any proposal which would impose an undue strain upon individuals, and which would affect the full stability for national purposes. The right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition has always been opposed even to a reduction to the quinquennial period, and has voted against it on recent occasions, and I trust that we shall have his support in resisting this 347 still more revolutionary proposal which was put forward by the hon. Gentleman behind him.
Mr. BALFOURThere are always a great many ingenious observations in the right hon. Gentleman's speeches, but they never seem to me to be consistent with each other. Although they may be admirable pictures by themselves, they do not fit into the same frame or make together a coherent picture. The right hon. Gentleman, for example, said that it was impossible or inexpedient to have triennial Parliaments, because under the existing system the expense was so great, but the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues have twice within a year put the country to the expense of an election under the existing system. At all events, the Government advised the Crown to dissolve, and they did it twice within a year, and threw that expense upon the Members standing for election, which the right hon. Gentleman thinks it necessary we should only have once in five years. It is all very well again to talk of the Lords in this connection. That is another of the observations of the right hon. Gentleman which did not fit in with the rest of his speech, because at the beginning of it he said that they could not be reproached with any reluctance to go to the people.
Apparently, according to the Home Secretary and the hon. Member who supported him from behind, there was no question of reluctance or want of reluctance, but they think they had to do it because of the Lords. Then do not make a virtue of it and do not say, "We love going to the people and consulting them and we are not complaining of their verdict," or else make the two observations in different speeches and not in the same speech. I confess I was rather surprised that the right hon. Gentleman should allude at all to the last election. I do not know how the House of Lords caused that election. It may be said, and I think said with truth, that what the House of Lords desired at the previous election was that the country should determine whether they wanted the 1909 Budget and in that sense I think it is true not that the Government wanted to go to the people, but that the Lords wanted to go to the people. I agree. But about the election in December last, who forced the Government into it?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLOf course, the Lords.
§ Mr. CHURCHILLBecause it was certain they would have refused to pass the Parliament Bill.
Mr. BALFOURBecause the right hon. Gentleman thinks the House of Lords would, under certain circumstances, have taken a certain course therefore the House of Lords forced the Government to go to the country upon an old register. A glorious specimen of Ministerial logic and a marvellous illustration of the passion which hon. Gentlemen have for consulting their constituents! While I do not think the right hon. Gentleman's speech was consistent with itself, there were some points in it with which I agree. I do agree that elections every three years would be a misfortune. I do not wish to see this limitation of three years. But let it be noted that my hon. Friend in his Amendment presses this Bill to its true and its only logical conclusion. I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that it would be bad for administration, and I think bad from many points of view, that we should have, necessarily, every two and a half years, for that is what it would come to, a general election. But let the House consider what the logic of the position is as presented to the country and the House by the Government Bill.
The Government say in the first two years of a Parliament it is fit to legislate, and so fit to legislate that it is a true mirror of the people, and it can force its will by a majority of one upon a reluctant House of Lords, and, it may be, a reluctant people. These are its powers during the first two years or three years, as the case may be, of its term of office. Then comes a period after two years have elapsed during which apparently it is fit to sustain a Ministry in office, but is not fit to carry legislation through over the heads of the House of Lords, nor does it continue to be an accurate mirror of the popular will. So that you have the House of Commons, under the Government, plan, divided into two sharply distinguished halves, the half which is fit to legislate alone as a single Chamber, and the half that is not fit to legislate alone as a single Chamber, during both of which it is fit, although it may not reflect the popular will in any full or accurate sense, to sustain in office at all events an administration against which the tide of popular feeling and 349 popular judgment is running, and may be running very strongly. That is an absurd theory. If the framers of this Bill are correct when they say, "We represent in some peculiar and exceptional manner the will of the constituencies, the feeling of the people, the settled determination of the democracy during our first two years, they are bound to vote for triennial Parliaments.
The theory that we are not fit to do it in the last two years, the conclusions drawn by my hon. Friend, that we are a representative Assembly in the sense that the Government mean, only in the first two years, and after that that we cease to carry out that function, to be the mirror of the people, to be their substitute for all purposes, that we sink to a lower plane, that we are able to make tentative efforts at legislation, to support a Government in office, but not to bear the whole burden of responsibility which apparently we can carry without difficulty in the first two years of our existence, is really an absolutely untenable theory of representative Government. In that sense my hon. Friend is perfectly right in saying the true conclusions of the Government Bill is that this House should only last without going to the people during that period in which on the theory of the Government themselves it truly, adequately, and completely reflects the will of the people. That is my hon. Friend's view, and he is perfectly justified in moving the Amendment, but I who believe that the whole theory of representation contained in the Bill and in the speeches of the Government is altogether alien to anything we can find either in the traditions of this country or the example of other countries, think it is a misfortune to make it incumbent upon Ministers to advise the Crown necessarily to dissolve every two years or two years and a half. I take the view that this Bill is not made better by being made more indefensible. It starts by being indefensible, and indefensible let it remain, and let us not try to make it more unconstitutional still.
§ Lord HUGH CECILI find myself in some difficulty as to the vote I should give in regard to this Amendment. My right hon. Friend has said that the further shortening of the duration of Parliament, even the shortening proposed by this Clause, is an unnecessary and undesirable thing apart from this Bill. The expense of frequent elections, the exhaustion of Members fighting frequent elections, the 350 sense of insecurity, the demagogy that spreads over the House of Commons when an election is immediately in prospect—all these things are against short, Parliaments, and I am averse to having a five years' limit if it were not for the provisions of this Bill. This Bill is, after all, an interim Bill confessedly. It is not intended by the Government, and still less by the Opposition, to be a permanent settlement of this question. Indeed, the Government in more than one of their speeches made it perfectly clear that they had so little prospect of returning with a majority after the next General Election, that one of their arguments is that they have got to make hay in this one legislative day which is given to them. They have to make the most of the opportunity Not only this Clause, but the whole Bill will be altered by the House of Commons which succeeds the present one, and therefore I do not see why we should not limit the present Parliament to three years until a wiser Parliament comes into being. The real question is whether you are to accept the machinery of the Bill or not. While the Bill lasts you have to accept it. The theory of the Bill is that this House is only the mirror of the people for a certain time after an election. Mirror is rather an insecure word to use in this connection. A mirror is an excellent thing in its way, but the metaphor does not apply in this case. The function of the House of Commons is not to supersede the original type it reflects, but only to reflect that type. The assumption that the House of Commons has an independent light is not consistent with the metaphor of the mirror. In this particular case we are trying to find security that the will of the people will not be misrepresented for a short term any more than for a long term.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYOn a point of Order, it does seem to me impossible that this Amendment should be in order in this form, because if it were carried you would then have three years substituted for the seven years provided for the duration of Parliament in the Septennial Act of 1715, and the result would be to make that Act a perfect farce. The preamble of that Act, among other things, recites:—
"Whereas by an Act of Parliament made in the sixth year of the reign of their late Majesties King William and Queen Mary of ever blessed memory entitled an Act for the frequent meeting and calling of Parliaments it was among 351 other things enacted that from thenceforth no Parliament whatsover that should at any time thereafter be called assembled or held should continue longer than for three years at the furthest to be counted from the day on which the writs of summons to the said Parliament were issued, and whereas it has been found by experience—"
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Mr. Whitley)I think that the Noble Lord need not read that. Subsequent Amendments on the Paper, he will see, do put the Amendment in order, and provide for a repeal of that Act.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYMay I submit that those Amendments cannot come on until this Amendment is discussed.
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANSupposing the Amendment to be carried they will.
Question, "That the word 'five' stand part of the Clause," put, and agreed to.
§ Mr. LAURENCE HARDYI beg to move "to leave out the word 'under' ['under the Septennial Act'], and to insert instead thereof the word 'and.'"
This Amendment is necessary if the Government are to go beyond the point at which they have arrived in this Clause. For some reason or another they do not desire that the Septennial Act should be repealed; and just as in a previous Clause they have said that an Act of Parliament means an Act that is only passed by one of the three estates of the realm, so now they are going to say that the duration of Parliament is to be only five years under what is called a Septennial Act. You are really going in for more absurdities and paradoxes in connection with this Bill than have ever been connected with any Statute before. Whatever they may say, they are repealing the Septennial Act in saying that the duration of Parliament is to be five years instead of seven. That clearly takes us out of the original Act, because the Noble Lord (Viscount Helmsley) was endeavouring to show when called to order just now that the Septennial Act only contains one Clause, namely, the substitution of seven for three years, and when you substitute another number for seven you repeal the Septennial Act straight and square. The fact is that the Government do not like in a sub-Clause of a Bill to be seen to repeal so important an Act as the Septennial Act, one of our standard Constitutional Acts, 352 which has been a very long time in existence, and has great authority behind it. Mr. Speaker Onslow was frequently heard to declare that the passing of the Septennial Act "formed the era of the emancipation of the British House of Commons from its former dependence on the Crown and its dependence on the House of Lords," so that Mr. Speaker Onslow thought that a very considerable-advantage in regard to the House of Lords, the primary object of this Bill. There are many other testimonies in favour of the Septennial Act in which I do not desire to detain the House at this time of night; but at all events the Act has behind it very great authority, and it has in the country a status which I think the Ministry very well know is at the bottom of their reason for this Clause, which gets round the repeal of the Septennial Act, leaving us with the absurdity of saying that the Septennial Act is one that makes the duration of Parliament five years. This Amendment does not raise the whole principle of the Clause, and it is one, therefore, upon which the-Government can very well make a concession. For the sake of having the Statute-in the best form possible, the Government will surely not refuse an Amendment which puts the Statute in a practical form, but will take the fair and honest line of acknowledging that this is really a repeal of the Septennial Act.
§ Sir RUFUS ISAACSThe hon. Member is under a misapprehension with regard to the effect of this Clause. It is not right to say that; by the proposed alteration from seven to five years the Septennial Act is repealed. The Septennial Act remains, and all that is changed is that you substitute five for seven years. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] If hon. Members will forgive me, that is just the misapprehension, as I am submitting to the House, under which they are resting, and on which they base their whole argument. If they look at the Act, they will find there are two provisions in it. The first is of considerable importance, I should have thought, at any rate, to hon. Members opposite, and on this side also. It fixes the point of time at which the years for the duration of Parliament are to begin to run. The other provision expressly enacts that notwithstanding there is a period fixed for the maximum duration of Parliament—that is, without prejudice to the-right of the King to dissolve Parliament. That is expressly stated in the second part of Clause 1 of that Act. The whole of 353 the Act remains except for the substitution which is provided for in this Clause, and if hon. Members will consult the Act of Parliament for themselves they will see what I have stated is correct. We preserve the whole of the Act with the substitution of the word "five" for "seven." What we do is not to repeal the Act, because we think it should be preserved, but merely to limit the years during which Parliament sits.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYI must say it seems remarkable to ask the House to call a Quinquennial Act a Septennial Act. That is what the Attorney-General's way of doing this amounts to. I would like to ask whether the Act which was altered by the Septennial Act does not also contain provisions saving the Prerogative of the Crown to dissolve Parliament. If that Act does contain these provisions then the argument of the Attorney-General breaks down. Even if the Attorney-General is right, should not the Government have accepted this Amendment which would have repealed the Septennial Act, and have accepted the Amendment moved earlier in the evening that nothing in this Bill shall alter the Prerogative of the Crown. Thus the whole case would be met, and the matter would not have been left in its present absurd and ridiculous position. I am sure even the
§ Government will not maintain that it is not absurd to call an Act limiting the duration of Parliament to five years a Septennial Act.
§ Lord HUGH CECILI just want to say one word by way of appeal or suggestion to the Government which they might adopt before the Report stage. The Attorney-General referred to the Septennial Act, and said there is much importance in part of it. The Preamble of the Septennial Act seems to me very pointed and excellent, and it might with a few alterations be very well adapted to the present Bill. For example, I read:—
"And the said provision if it should continue may probably at this juncture when a restless and Popish faction are designing and endeavouring to renew a rebellion within this country—"
"When a restless and Popish faction desire to introduce a Home Rule Bill" would be a great addition, and make the Preamble of this Bill a great deal more candid. I think we have a good deal to learn from our ancestors. I hope the Attorney-General will study the wording of the Act.
§ Question put, "That the word 'under' stand part of the Clause."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 271; Noes, 149.
357| Division No. 211.] | AYES | [11.33 p.m. |
| Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour) | Bytes, William Pollard | Elverston, Harold |
| Abraham, Rt. Hon. William (Rhondda) | Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) | Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Chancellor, Henry George | Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) |
| Adamson, William | Chapple, Dr. William Allen | Essex, Richard Walter |
| Addison, Dr. C. | Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S. | Falconer, James |
| Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R. | Clough, William | Fenwick, Charles |
| Ainsworth, John Stirling | Clynes, John R. | Ferens, Thomas Robinson |
| Alden, Percy | Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock) | Ffrench, Peter |
| Allen, A. A. (Dumbartonshire) | Collins, Stephen (Lambeth) | Field, William |
| Allen, Charles Peter (Stroud) | Condon, Thomas Joseph | Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward |
| Armitage, Robert | Corbett, A. Cameron | Fitzgibbon, John |
| Ashton, Thomas Gair | Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Flavin, Michael Joseph |
| Athrricy-Jones, Llewellyn A. | Cory, Sir Clifford John | France, G. A. |
| Baker, H. T. (Accrington) | Cotton, William Francis | Gelder, Sir W. A. |
| Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury, E.) | Craig. Herbert J. (Tynemouth) | Gibson, Sir James Puckering |
| Barnes, George N. | Crawshay-Williams, Eliot | Gill, A. H. |
| Barran, Sir J. N. (Hawick) | Crooks, William | Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst (Leeds, N.) | Crumley, Patrick | Goldstone, Frank |
| Barry, Redmond John (Tyrone, N.) | Dalziel, Sir James H. (Kirkcaldy) | Greenwood, Granville G. (Peterborough) |
| Barton, William | Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Greig, Colonel James William |
| Beale, W. P. | Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) | Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward |
| Beauchamp, Edward | Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.) | Griffith, Ellis Jones |
| Bentham, G. J. | Dawes, J. A. | Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.) |
| Black, Arthur W. | Denman, Hon. R. D. | Gulland, John William |
| Booth, Frederick Handel | Devlin, Joseph | Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway) |
| Bowerman, C. W. | Dewar Sir J. A. | Hackett, John |
| Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North | Dillon, John | Hall, Frederick (Normanton) |
| Brace, William | Doris, William | Hancock, J. G. |
| Brady, Patrick Joseph | Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) |
| Brigg, Sir John | Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley) | Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil) |
| Brocklehurst, William B. | Edwards, Allen C. (Glamorgan, E.) | Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) |
| Burns, Rt. Hon. John | Edwards, Enoch Hanley | Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, W.) |
| Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas | Edwards, John Hugh (Glamorgan, Mid) | Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.) |
| Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, N.) | Elibank, Rt. Hon. Master of | Harwood, George |
| Haslam, James (Derbyshire) | Manfield, Harry | Roche, John (Galway, E.) |
| Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth) | Marks, George Croydon | Roe, Sir Thomas |
| Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry | Mason, David M. (Coventry) | Rose, Sir Charles Day |
| Haworth, Arthur A. | Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.) | Rowntree, Arnold |
| Hayden, John Patrick | Meehan, Patrick A. (Queen's Co.) | Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter |
| Hayward, Evan | Millar, James Duncan | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Healy, Maurice | Molloy, Michael | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) |
| Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Molteno, Percy Alport | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Henderson, J. M. (Aberdeen, W.) | Money, L. G. Chiozza | Scanlan, Thomas |
| Henry, Sir Charles S. | Mooney, John J. | Schwann, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles E. |
| Herbert, Col. Sir Ivor | Morrell, Philip | Scott, A. MacCallum (Gies., Bridgeton) |
| Higham, John Sharp | Munro-Ferguson, Rt. Hon. R. C. | Seely, Colonel, Rt. Hon. J. E. B. |
| Hinds, John | Needham, Christopher T. | Sheehy, David |
| Hodge, John | Neilson, Francis | Simon, Sir John Allsebrook |
| Holt, Richard Durning | Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncaster) | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) |
| Hope, John Deans (Haddington) | Nolan, Joseph | Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.) |
| Horne, C. Silvester (Ipswich) | Norman, Sir Henry | Snowden, Philip |
| Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Norton, Captain Cecil W. | Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.) |
| Hughes, Spencer Leigh | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Strachey Sir Edward |
| Hunter, William (Lanark, Govan) | O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) | Summers, James Wooley |
| Illingworth, Percy H. | O'Doherty, Philip | Sutton, John E. |
| Isaacs, Sir Rufus Daniel | O'Dowd, John | Taylor John W. (Durham) |
| John, Edward Thomas | Ogden Fred | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Johnson, W. | O'Grady, James | Thorne, William (West Ham) |
| Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil) | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) | Toulmin, George |
| Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth) | O'Malley, William | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Jones, Leif Stratten, (Notts, Rushcliffe) | O'Neill, Or. Charles (Armagh, S.) | Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander |
| Jones, William (Carnarvonshire) | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. | Verney, Sir Harry |
| Jones, W. S. Glyn- (T.H'mts, Stepney) | O'Sullivan, Timothy | Walsh, Stephen (Lancs., Ince) |
| Joyce, Michael | Palmer, Godfrey Mark | Wardle, George J. |
| Keating, Matthew | Parker, James (Halifax) | Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay |
| Kellaway, Frederick George | Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek) | Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney) |
| Kelly, Edward | Pearson, Hon. Weetman H. M. | Watt, Henry A, |
| Kennedy, Vincent Paul | Pease Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) | Webb, H. |
| Kilbride, Denis | Phillips, John (Longford, S.) | White, Sir George (Norfolk) |
| King, Joseph (Somerset, North | Plckersgill, Edward Hare | White, Sir Luke (York, E.R.) |
| Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) | Pointer, Joseph | White, Patrick (Meath, North |
| Lansbury, George | Pollard, Sir George H. | Whitehouse, John Howard |
| Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West) | Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. | Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P. |
| Lawson Sir W. (Cumb'rld.,Cockerm'th) | Price, Sir R. J. (Norfolk, E.) | Whyte, A. F. |
| Levy, Sir Maurice | Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford. E.) | Wiles, Thomas |
| Lewis, John Herbert | Primrose, Hon. Neil James | Wilkie, Alexander |
| Logan, John William | Pringle, William M. R. | Williams, John (Glamorgan) |
| Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas | Radford, George Heynes | Williams, Llewelyn (Carmarthen) |
| Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich) | Raphael, Sir Herbert H. | Wiliams, Penry (Middlesbrough) |
| Lundon, Thomas | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) | Wilson, Hon. G. G. (Hull, W.) |
| Lyell, Charles Henry | Reddy, Michael | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.) |
| Lynch, Arthur Alfred | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) | Wilson, J. W. (Worcestershire, N.) |
| Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester) | Redmond, William (Clare, E.) | Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton) |
| Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs) | Rendall, Athelstan | Winfrey, Richard |
| Maclean, Donald | Richards, Thomas | Wood, T. M'Kinnon (Glasgow) |
| Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J. | Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) | Young, Samuel (Cavan, E.) |
| MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) | Young, William (Perth, East) |
| MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Roberts, George H. (Norwich) | |
| M`Callum, John M. | Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. |
| M'Curdy, Charles Albert | Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford) | Dudley Ward and Mr. Wedgwood |
| M'Laren, F. W. S. (Lincs., Spadling) | Robertson, John M. (Tyneside) | Benn. |
| M'Laren, Walter S. B. (Ches., Crewe) | Robinson, Sidney | |
| NOES. | ||
| Acland-Hood, Rt. Hon. Sir Alex. F. | Bigland, Alfred | Dalrymple, Viscount |
| Altken, William Max | Bird, Alfred | Dixon, Charles Harvey |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Boscawen, Col. A. S. T. Griffith- | Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- |
| Ashley, Wilfrid W. | Boyton, James | Du Gros, Arthur Philip |
| Astor, Waldorf | Bridgeman, W. Clive | Duke, Henry Edward |
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Bull, Sir William James | Faber, Captain W. V. (Hants, W.) |
| Begot, Lieut-Colonel J. | Burdett-Coutts, William | Fell, Arthur |
| Baird, John Lawrence | Burn, Colonel C. R. | Fisher, William Hayes |
| Baker, Sir Randolf L. (Dorset, N.) | Butcher, John George | Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A. |
| Balcarres, Lord | Carlile, Edward Hildred | Fleming, Valentine |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Cassel, Felix | Fletcher, John Samuel (Hampstead) |
| Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (City, Lond.) | Castlereagh, Viscount | Forster, Henry William |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Cator, John | Foster, Philip Staveley |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Cautley, Henry Strother | Gardner, Ernest |
| Baring, Captain Hon. Guy Victor | Cave, George | Gibbs, George Abraham |
| Banston, H. | Cecil, Lord Hugh (Oxford Univ.) | Goldman, Charles Sydney |
| Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N.) | Chaloner, Col. R. G. W. | Goulding, Edward Alfred |
| Bathurst, Hon. Allen B. (Glos., E.) | Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. A. (Worcr.) | Grant, J. A. |
| Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks | Clay, Captain H. H. Spender | Green, Walter Raymond |
| Beckett, Hon. William Gervase | Clive, Percy Archer | Gretton, John |
| Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth) | Clyde, James Avon | Guinness, Hon. Walter Edward |
| Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich) | Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet) | Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight) |
| Bennett-Goldney, Francis | Craik, Sir Henry | Hall, Fred (Dulwich) |
| Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish | Crichton-Stuart, Lord Ninian | Hamersley, Alfred St. George |
| Hamilton, Marquess of (Londonderry) | MacCaw, Wm. J. MacGeagh | Rolleston, Sir John |
| Helmsley, Viscount | Mackinder, Halford J. | Rutherford, William (W. Derby) |
| Hill, Sir Clement L. | Macmaster, Donald | Sanders, Robert Athur |
| Hillier, Dr. Alfred Peter | M'Calmont, Colonel James | Sanderson, Lancelot |
| Hill-Wood, Samuel | Magnus, Sir Philip | Salter, Arthur Clavell |
| Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy | Malcolm, Ian | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Hope, Harry (Bute) | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Stanler, Beville |
| Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Meysey-Thompson, E. C. | Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk) |
| Horner, Arthur Long | Mildmay, Francis Bingham | Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston) |
| Houston, Robert Paterson | Mills, Hen. Charles Thomas | Steel-Maitland, A. D. |
| Hume-Williams, William Ellis | Newman, John R. P. | Stewart, Gershom |
| Hunt, Rowland | Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield) | Strauss, Arthur (Paddington, North |
| Hunter, Sir Charles Rodk. (Bath) | Nield, Herbert | Swift, Rigby |
| Ingleby, Holcombe | Norton-Griffiths, J. | Sykes, Alan John |
| Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, E.) | O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid) | Terrell, Henry (Gloucester) |
| Joynson-Hicks, William | Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A. | Thynne, Lord Alexander |
| Kebty-Fletcher, J. R. | Paget, Almeric Hugh | Valentia, Viscount |
| Kerry, Earl of | Parkes, Ebenezer | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Kirkwood, John H. M. | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) | Wheler, Granville C. H. |
| Larmor, Sir J. | Peel, Hon. W. R. W. (Taunton) | White, Major G. D. (Lancs., Southport) |
| Law, Andrew Bonar (Bootle, Lancs.) | Perkins, Walter Frank | Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Locker-Lampson, G. (Salisbury) | Pollock, Ernest Murray | Willoughby, Major Hon. Claude |
| Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsey) | Pretyman, Ernest George | Yate, Colonel C. E. |
| Lockwood, Rt. Hon. Lieut.-Col. A. R. | Pryce-Jones, Colonel E. | |
| Long, Rt. Hon. Walter | Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. |
| Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Rawson, Colonel Richard H. | Laurence Hardy and Earl Winterton. |
| Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droitwich) | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThe question is, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
§ Mr. WATSON RUTHERFORDMr. Whitley, may I on a point of Order ask if we are to understand that in putting the question that the Clause stand part of the Bill that you have ruled out of order the Amendment of which I gave notice? That Amendment is to add certain words at the end of the Clause.
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThe Amendment was not in order.
§ Mr. WATSON RUTHERFORDI would like, very respectfully, Sir, to point out that the whole discussion that we have had upon this Clause has very largely turned upon the amount of expense and difficulty which the shortening of Parliaments will cause to Members. This has been referred to in almost every speech up till now. The object of my Amendment was that where a Member has been returned after a contested election, he; ought not to he opposed again if a General Election came within three years.
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThe hon. Member's proposed Amendment deals with electoral matters outside the scope of the Clause.
§ Mr. WATSON RUTHERFORDI accept your ruling.
§ Question put, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
Mr. BAR NSTON(speaking seated with his hat on): On a point of Order, may I inquire as to my Amendment?
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANI have already put the Question.
§ Mr. BARNSTONWith great respect I did not hear; but may I ask, on a point of Order, is it not usual, if I may say so with great respect, to call upon a Member when he rises to move an Amendment?
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThe hon. Member did not rise until after I put the Question and collected the voices.
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 257; Noes, 114.
361| Division No. 212.] | AYES. | [11.45 p.m. |
| Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour) | Barry, Redmond John (Tyrone, N.) | Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, North |
| Abraham, Rt. Hon. William (Rhondda) | Barton, William | Byles, William Pollard |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Beale, William Phipson | Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) |
| Adamson, William | Beauchamp, Edward | Chancellor, Henry George |
| Addison, Dr. Christopher | Bentham, George Jackson | Chapple, Dr. William Allen |
| Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R. | Black, Arthur W. | Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S. |
| Ainsworth, John Stirling | Booth, Frederick Handel | Clough, William |
| Allen, Arthur Acland (Dumbartonshire) | Bowerman, Charles W. | Clynes, John R. |
| Allen, Charles Peter (Stroud) | Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, N.) | Collins, G. P. (Greenock) |
| Armitage, Robert | Brace, William | Collins, Stephen (Lambeth) |
| Baker, H. T. (Accrington) | Brady, Patrick Joseph | Condon, Thomas Joseph |
| Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury, E.) | Bridgeman, William Clive | Corbett, A. Cameron |
| Barnes, George N. | Brigg, Sir John | Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. |
| Barran, Sir J. N. (Hawick) | Brocklehurst, William B. | Cotton, William Francis |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst (Leeds, N.) | Burns, Rt. Hon. John | Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth) |
| Crawshay-Williams, Eliot | Illingworth, Percy H. | Pollard, Sir George H. |
| Crooks, William | Isaacs, Sir Rufus Daniel | Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. |
| Crumley, Patrick | John, Edward Thomas | Price, Sir Robert J. (Norfolk, E.) |
| Dalziel, Sir James H. (Kirkcaldy) | Johnson, William | Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) |
| Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Jones, Edgar R. (Merthyr Tydvil) | Primrose Hon. Neil James |
| Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) | Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth) | Pringle, William M. R. |
| Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.) | Jones, Leif Stratten (Notts, Rushcliffe) | Radford, G. H |
| Dawes, J. A. | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire) | Raphael, Sir Herbert Henry |
| Denman, Hon. R. D. | Jones, W. S. Glyn- (Stepney) | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) |
| Devlin, Joseph | Joyce, Michael | Reddy, Michael |
| Dewar, Sir J. A. | Keating, Matthew | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Dillon, John | Kellaway, Frederick George | Redmond, William (Clare, E.) |
| Doris, William | Kelly, Edward | Rendall, Athelstan |
| Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | Kennedy, Vincent Paul | Richards, Thomas |
| Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley) | King, J. (Somerset, N.) | Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) |
| Edwards, Allen G. (Glamorgan, E.) | Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Edwards, Enoch (Hanley) | Lansbury, George | Roberts, George H. (Norwich) |
| Edwards, John Hugh (Glamorgan, Mid) | Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.) | Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs.) |
| Elibank, Rt. Hon. Master of | Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld., Cockerm'th) | Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford) |
| Elverston, Harold | Levy, Sir Maurice | Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside) |
| Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) | Lewis, John Herbert | Robinson, Sidney |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) | Logan, John William | Roe, Sir Thomas |
| Essex, Richard Walter | Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas | Rose, Sir Charles Day |
| Falconer, James | Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich) | Rowntree, Arnold |
| Fenwick, Charles | Lundon, Thomas | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Ferens, Thomas Robinson | Lyell, Charles Henry | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) |
| Ffrench, Peter | Lynch, Arthur Alfred | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Field, William | Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester) | Scanlan, Thomas |
| Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward | Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs) | Scott,A.MacCallum (Glasgew, Bridgeton) |
| Fitzgibbon, John | Maclean, Donald | Seely, Col. Rt. Hon. J. E. B. |
| Flavin, Michael Joseph | Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J. | Sheehy, David |
| France, G. A. | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Simon, Sir John Allsebrook |
| Gelder, Sir William Alfred | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) |
| Gibson, Sir James Puckering | M'Curdy, Charles Albert | Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.) |
| Gill, Alfred Henry | M'Laren, F. W. S. (Lincs., Spalding) | Snowden, Philip |
| Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford | M'Laren, Walter S. B. (Ches., Crewe) | Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.) |
| Goldstone, Frank | Manfield, Harry | Summers, James Woolley |
| Greenwood, Granville G. (Peterborough) | Marks, George Croydon | Sutton, John E. |
| Greig, Colonel James William | Mason, David M. (Coventry) | Taylor, John W. (Durham) |
| Griffith, Ellis Jones | Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.) | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.) | Meehan, Patrick A. (Queen's Co.) | Thorne, William (West Ham) |
| Gulland, John William | Millar, James Duncan | Toulmin, George |
| Gwynn, Stephen Lucius | Molloy, Michael | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Hackett, John | Money, L. G. Chiozza | Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander |
| Hall, F. (Yorks, Normanton) | Mooney, J. J. | Verney, Sir Harry |
| Hancock, John George | Morrell Philip | Walsh, Stephen (Lancs., Ince) |
| Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) | Munro-Ferguson, Rt. Hon. R. C. | Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay |
| Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil) | Needham, Christopher T. | Wason, J. Cathcart (Orkney) |
| Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) | Neilson, Francis | Webb, H. |
| Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West) | Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncaster) | White, Sir George (Norfolk) |
| Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.) | Nolan, Joseph | White, Sir Luke (York, E.R.) |
| Harwood, George | Norman, Sir Henry | White, Patrick (Meath, North |
| Haslam, James (Derbyshire) | Norton, Captain Cecil W. | Whitehouse, John Howard |
| Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth) | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir T. P. |
| Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry | O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) | Whyte, Alexander F. (Perth) |
| Haworth, Arthur A. | O'Doherty, Philip | Wiles, Thomas |
| Hayden, John Patrick | O'Dowd, John | Wilkie, Alexander |
| Hayward, Evan | Ogden, Fred | Williams, J. (Glamorgan) |
| Helme, Norval Watson | O'Grady, James | Williams, Llewellyn (Carmarthen) |
| Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) | Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough) |
| Henderson, J. M'D. (Aberdeen. W.) | O'Malley, William | Wilson, Hon. G. G. (Hull, W.) |
| Henry, Sir Charles S. | O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.) | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid) |
| Herbert, Col. Sir Ivor (Mon., South) | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. | Wilson, J. W. (Worcestershire, N.) |
| Higham, John Sharp | O'Sullivan, Timothy | Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton) |
| Hinds, John | Palmer, Godfrey Mark | Wood, T. McKinnon (Glasgow) |
| Hodge, John | Parker, James (Halifax) | Young, Samuel (Cavan, East) |
| Holt, Richard Durning | Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek) | Young, William (Perth, East) |
| Hope, John Deans (Haddington) | Pearson. Hon. Weetman H. M. | |
| Horne, Charles Silvester (Ipswich) | Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. |
| Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Phillips, John (Longford, S) | Dudley Ward and Mr. Wedgwood |
| Hughes, Spencer Leigh | Pickersgill, Edward Hare | Benn. |
| Hunter, William (Lanark, Govan) | Pointer, Joseph | |
| NOES. | ||
| Acland-Hood, Rt. Hon. Sir Alex. F. | Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Bird, Alfred |
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Banner, John S. Harmood- | Boscawen, Col. Sackville T. Griffith- |
| Altken, William Max. | Barnston, Harry | Bull, Sir William James |
| Ashley, Wilfrid W. | Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N.) | Burdett-Coutts, William |
| Astor, Waldorf | Bathurst, Hon. Allen B. (Glouc., E.) | Burn, Colonel C. R. |
| Bagel, Lieut-Colonel J. | Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks | Carlile, Edward Hildred |
| Baird, John Lawrence | Beckett, Hon. William Gervase | Cassel, Felix |
| Baker, Sir Randolf L. (Dorset, N.) | Bennett-Goldney, Francis | Castlereagh, Viscount |
| Balcarres, Lord | Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish | Cautley, Henry Strother |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Beresford, Lord Charles | Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W. |
| Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. A. (Worc'r) | Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) |
| Clay, Captain H. H. Spender | Hope, Harry (Bute) | Peel, Hon. W R. W. (Taunton) |
| Clyde, James Avon | Horner, Andrew Long | Pollock, Ernest Murray |
| Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet) | Houston, Robert Paterson | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Crack, Sir Henry | Hume-Williams, William Ellis | Pryce-Jones, Colonel E. |
| Crichton-Stuart, Lord Ninian | Hunt, Rowland | Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel |
| Dalrymple, Viscount | Hunter, Sir Charles Rodk. (Bath) | Rawson, Colonel Richard H. |
| Dixon, Charles Harvey | Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East) | Salter, Arthur Clavell |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Joynson-Hicks, William | Sanders, Robert Arthur |
| Du Cros, Arthur Philip | Kebty-Fletcher, J. R. | Sanderson, Lancelot |
| Duke, Henry Edward | Kerry, Earl of | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Fell, Arthur | Kirkwood, John H. M. | Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk) |
| Fisher, William Hayes | Larmor, Sir J. | Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston) |
| Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A. | Law, Andrew Bonar (Bootle, Lancs.) | Steel-Maitland, A. D. |
| Fletcher, John Samuel (Hampstead) | Lockwood, Rt. Hon. Lt.-Col. A. R. | Stewart, Gershom |
| Forster, Henry William | Long, Rt. Hon. Walter | Strauss, Arthur (Paddington, North |
| Foster, Philip Staveley | Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Swift, Rigby |
| Goldsmith, Frank | Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droitwich) | Thynne, Lord Alexander |
| Goulding, E. A. | MacCaw, Wm. J. MacGeagh | Valentia, Viscount |
| Grant, J. A. | Macmaster Donald | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Greene, Walter Raymond | M'Calmont, Colonel James | Wheler, Granville C. H. |
| Gretton, John | Malcolm, Ian | White, Major G. D. (Lancs., Southport) |
| Guinness, Hon. Walter Edward | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight) | Meysey-Thompson, E. C. | Yate, Colonel C. E. |
| Hall, Fred (Dulwich) | Mildmay, Francis Bingham | |
| Hamersley, Alfred St. George | Newman, John R. P. | |
| Hamilton, Marquess of (Londonderry) | Norton-Griffiths, J. | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. |
| Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford) | O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid) | Watson Rutherford and Earl |
| Hillier, Dr. Alfred Peter | Orde-Pewlett, Hon. W. G. A. | Winterton. |
| Hill-Wood, Samuel | Parkes, Ebenezer |