§ Ordered, That a Select Committee be appointed to consider and report whether any and, if so, what alterations are desirable in the practice and procedure of this House with regard to public business.—[Mr. Illingworth.]
§ Mr. ILLINGWORTH (Lord of the Treasury)
I beg to move, "That the Committee do consist of sixteen Members."
Mr. CATHCART WASON
I beg to move to add, at the end, the words "chosen by ballot from the respective groups in the House in the following proportion: Liberals six, Unionists six, Irish Nationalists two, Irish Independent party one, and Labour one."
I should like to enter my emphatic protest against the Government having put down a very strong controversial measure of this sort just in front of another controversial measure.
§ Mr. SPEAKER
The hon. Member is too late in raising anything of that sort. The only question he can now debate is how the sixteen Members who are to form this Committee are to be appointed.
Mr. CATHCART WASON
I thank you for allowing me to make that preliminary observation. Ever since this Motion appeared on the Order Paper it was quite evident to hon. Members on this side that it gave satisfaction to nobody. The various Amendments which come after mine clearly indicate that. I am not going to criticise for a moment the names the Government have put down of colleagues and Friends of ours on both sides of the House, still I am sure most of the House will agree with me that it would be extremely undesirable to have a debate upon what is, after all, the personal element, and it is with that object that I have put down the Amendment standing in my name, which, I believe, commands certainly a very considerable amount of support on this side of the House, whatever it may do on the other. Perhaps hon. Members opposite are better pleased with the selection than hon. Members on this side. Of course it is one of those matters in which I think everyone will agree that the House ought to have a certain amount of liberty and not one on which the Government 1372 should put on their Whips. I may say frankly that if my Amendment is negatived, I shall vote straight through against my hon. Friends' other Amendments by which they propose to place one name against another. It is only fair to the Government to say that. I think it will save a considerable amount of time and be more consistent with the dignity of this House, if we pass the Amendment which I now move.
§ Sir GODFREY BARING
I beg to second the Amendment. I have no desire to enter into any kind of criticism of the names submitted in the Motion, but I think that on these personal matters when Amendments are down on the Paper to leave out certain names and substitute others a somewhat invidious duty is imposed on hon. Members who support one name as against another. One hon. Member proposes to substitute the hon. Member for North-West Lanark (Mr. Pringle) for the hon. Member for the Montrose Burghs (Mr. Robert Harcourt). I cannot conceive a more disagreeable and embarrassing situation than that the House of Commons should be called upon to decide as between these two gentlemen. I think in so important a matter as this it is essential that the House of Commons should have the fullest possible choice. Although the sixteen names in the Motion may be very excellent names, I am not at all sure that if we submitted the nominations to a ballot we might not provide a better Committee. The Amendment proposes that the vote should be in camera. That is a system which has been adopted in other Assemblies, and which might be adopted here with advantage. I shall have the greatest pleasure in supporting the Amendment.
§ The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Asquith)
I am sure that my hon. Friends who have made themselves responsible for this Amendment as to the selection of this Committee by ballot would not say that the Government exercised any influence of any sort or kind over the selection of these names except as regards six of the Members. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] The Members are nominated in accordance with the undertaking which I gave when the question was originally debated. The Government have nominated six of the Members and the whole of the rest are drawn in the usual way from other quarters of the House. What I wish to observe is that 1373 the names have been allocated, in fact, in the proportions which my hon. Friends desire, Six belong to the regular supporters of the Government, six are Unionists, and two are Irish Nationalists, whose names were suggested by the hon. and learned Member for Waterford (Mr. J. Redmond), one is an Independent Nationalist, and one a Labour Member, so that we have selected the names exactly in the way my hon. Friend suggests so far as the balance of parties is concerned. It will be entirely in the discretion of the House to propose other names if it is considered those proposed do not properly represent the balance of parties. It would be a very reasonable objection to take. The House has complete control over the names, but I see no reason why the Motion should not be passed in the form now proposed.
§ Mr. KING
I only express my difference from the Prime Minister with great hesitation, but I do so with some confidence on this occasion, for this reason: I believe the Prime Minister, who generally apprehends the sense and feeling of this House, does not understand how this matter is regarded in all parts of the House of Commons except on the two Front Benches. If he had heard the conversation which has been indulged in frequently in regard to this Motion, he would have gathered something which would have enlightened him.
§ Mr. KING
That is a challenge which I shall not accept, though I am usually ready confidently to reply to any challenge. [An HON. MEMBER: "Why?"] Because it might involve me in having to repeat un-parliamentary epithets. Seriously this point ought to be understood by the Prime Minister. There are several of these names—in fact there are more than two, more than three, more than four of these names—I will not go any further—which do represent a tendency which we do not want to have stronger than is necessary in this House. They represent officialism, and a tendency to block all proposals coming from private Members. We understood that the Committee was to be appointed in order to provide that private Members might have a chance. I say that the names proposed for the composition of the Committee indicate that the reverse would be the result. I therefore most earnestly represent to the Prime Minister 1374 that if he cannot give way, he should, at any rate, indicate a large alteration in the list of names when we come to consider them individually. I beg to support the Amendment most heartily, and if it is necessary to go to a Division, I shall endeavour to prevail upon other Members, to support it.
§ Mr. BECK
It is with considerable reluctance that I rise to support the Amendment. We do not want to enter into recriminations as to who is or who is not fit to sit on the Committee. I suppose all of us have full confidence in the Committee which has been proposed, but it is idle to, deny that there is some dissatisfaction about the selection of the Committee. I remember an occasion on which I was personally concerned when a Committee was appointed to consider the matter of London traffic, and when there was such an outcry on the part of parties interested in the constitution of that Committee that I myself and others were asked to retire in order to make way for others more interested in and conversant with the subject. I would ask the Prime Minister to consider this question more sympathetically than he has done hitherto. There is a feeling in this House that some of our oldest and most weighty Members are not adequately represented on the Committees which are set up. The younger Members of the House can speak freely on this matter. There are Members here who have vast knowledge of the procedure and working of, this House, and we consider that they are very much passed over in the appointment of Committees. I shall, feeling quite conscious of being in the right, support the Amendment if it goes to a Division.
§ Sir FREDERICK BANBURY
May I ask the hon. Member (Mr. Cathcart Wason) what he really means by the words "chosen by ballot." Does he mean that all the names shall be put into a box and voted on secretly, and that those which are first drawn shall be taken to, constitute the Committee.
Mr. CATHCART WASON
What mean is that hon. Members on the opposite side of the House should elect by ballot those Members who seem to them most desirable to place on the Committee, while we on this side of the House, representing the Liberal party shall do the same thing with respect to the Members we desire to serve on the Committee. We 1375 should not vote on the names of the Committee at all, but hand to the Patronage Secretary the names of those we wish to be included in the ballot.
§ Mr. SHERWELL
Although I do not feel that the suggestion made by my hon. Friend in the Amendment now before the House is the most perfect way of realising his object, I shall support him in the Lobby as the only way of entering an objection to the manner in which these Committees are from time to time appointed. In the present case where the object of the Motion put down by the Government is to allow the average Member of the House to pass in review the arrangements for the procedure of this House, and in order to test the possibility of facilitating the progress of legislation, and particularly private Members' legislation, I cannot help thinking, this being the primary intention of the Motion, that the nomination of the Committee has been too narrow in its character. No one contends that the particular names included in the nomination do not give other than an official complexion. There can be no sort of objection to the names individually.
§ The PRIME MINISTER
My hon. Friend says that the names give an official complexion to the Committee. Will he kindly indicate what names he means?
§ Mr. SHERWELL
My point is this. The Committee is constituted by nomination of the Whips of the two great parties represented in this House. That is not a desirable way of selecting the members of a Committee for so practical a purpose as is the purpose of the present Committee. My hon. Friend who preceded me complained of the names selected, on the ground that the older and weightier Members of this House had their claims ignored. My objection to the Committee is of quite a different character. There is no Member of this House who has tried more assiduously to avoid nomination on any Committee than I have done, and therefore I do not share my hon. Friend's confidence that we all of us feel ourselves qualified to serve on any Committee. But looking at the names which appear in the Notice of Motion I find that eight of them, or one half of the total number, had a connection with this House prior to or as early as the year 1892. It does not need one to have a prolonged memory in this House to be perfectly conscious of the benumbing influence of the 1376 traditions and atmosphere of this House where rules and procedure are concerned; and I do think that a Committee of this character should present an opportunity for the service of Members who have a much more recent association with the House, and can bring to bear upon the consideration of this question a freshness of point of view which otherwise may be lacking. The Prime Minister questioned my reference as to the Committee being official in its complexion. I very strongly object personally to the Whips of the two great parties being represented on this Committee. I am perfectly well aware that the Whips have expert knowledge and experience of the rules and procedure of this House, but it does not follow that because the Whips are not personally Members of the Committee therefore no opportunity is afforded to them of presenting their views to the Committee, and I suggest that a very ready and direct way of presenting their suggestions to the Committee is by occupying a seat in the witness chair. Therefore, I should personally like to see the Whips association with the Committee ended by having them excluded and the names of others substituted. There is a perfectly natural, and, from their point of view, legitimate desire on the part of the Whips, to keep control of the arrangements of the business of the House, but the result is that the interests of private legislation, often of an urgent character, are again and again prejudiced because of the overwhelming control exercised by the Whips in the arrangement of the business of the House. For these reasons, and also because there are certain members nominated on this Committee who have what I may term a vested interest in the existing rule, and are therefore not the best qualified to suggest improvements in procedure, I shall vote for the Amendment of my hon. Friend.
§ Mr. F. WHYTE
The right hon. Gentleman says that it would be a mistake to depart from the method usually employed in the appointment of Select Committees, especially to adopt the method of selection by ballot, and he says that the names are put one by one from the Chair in order that reasonable objection, if such exists, may be taken; but it would be most unpleasant if we had to divide either on this or on any other occasion as to the respective merits of different names, and therefore we come back to the original method of selection. I am quite sure that the dissatisfaction which exists in a great many 1377 parts of the House with the present composition of this Committee, is due not so much to any question of disagreement with the names of particular persons, though I know that the disagreement in some cases is pretty strong, as to the fact that the decision to appoint six Members from this side and six Members from that side of the House in the main emerged from secret conclaves. That is to say, the general sense of the, House—though I know that there is a difficulty in the matter—is not taken as to who should be selected. I agree that while the actual official element of the Whips from either side of the House is meagrely represented on the Committee, none the less the membership of the Committee is essentially of an official character. It is rather remarkable that the tiniest party in the House should find itself represented in full upon the Committee. I refer to the hon. Baronet the Member for the City of London (Sir F. Banbury) and the hon. Member for Pontefract (Mr. Booth). I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Pontefract does not take umbrage at my reference to him in that character, because he openly and proudly confesses to it.
§ Mr. F. WHYTE
My hon. Friend has made a perfectly legitimate thrust, but, humorous suggestions or none on his part, his actions prove that his words had some meaning in them. On that ground I say that these two hon. Gentlemen form in themselves a party which, as my hon. Friend says, have a distinct vested interest in the present rules of procedure. There is a further point. A Committee of this kind ought to be peculiarly the production of the House as a whole, because what is at stake at this moment? Not the interests of the Government with regard to the control of the House, but the interests of the private Member. After the deliberations of this Committee are completed, and after it has reported, it still rests with His Majesty's Government to decide what is to be done, and nothing but the most overwhelming pressure, not only from his own side of the House but from the other side of the House, could move them, if they were unwilling, to take action on the Report of a Committee which was as comparatively hostile to their own views. Therefore I think that the official character of this Committee is deserving 1378 of some public remark before we take a vote on the subject, and although, like the hon. Member for Huddersfield and the hon. Member for Saffron Walden, I do not care for the form in which the Member for Orkney has put his Motion, I shall be compelled to support the Amendment as a protest against the way in which the Committee has been appointed.
§ The PRIME MINISTER
I have given as good advice to the House as I can on this subject. This is not a matter in which the Government have any concern at all, and they will gladly defer to any general expression of opinion by the House. I have only two things to say. It is said that this proposed Committee is official in character. I only wish to say, first, that fourteen out of the sixteen Members proposed are private Members and non-official; and so far as regards the Whips' Department, my hon. Friend (Mr. Illingworth) is perfectly willing that his Department should not be represented. I think it is a most patriotic position he has taken up in the circumstances, with his almost unrivalled knowledge of procedure. I should have thought, also, that there could be no objection to the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Sanders), who represents the other side. So far as concerns the suggestion that the Government are putting on a Whip, and that the Opposition are putting on a Whip with some sinister design to control the proceedings in their own interest, there is no ground whatever for it, and I trust that the House will now come to a decision.
§ Earl WINTERTON
Before we go to a Division I should like to associate myself with the hon. Member for Huddersfield (Mr. Sherwell) in what he said. I do not myself care for the particular Amendment which has been moved, but I shall certainly support it as a protest against the composition of the Committee. In regard to what the Prime Minister has said, I should have thought the suggestion that the two Whips might give evidence before the Committee would give it the advantage of the knowledge of precedure which they possess, and then there could be no suggestion that the Whips were in any way attempting to influence the proceedings of that body in favour of an alteration of procedure which would make their power even greater than it is at present.
§ Mr. PIRIE
I are sorry that the Prime Minister asks us to come to a decision 1379 on this very important subject, which we have been debating only for half an hour. The Amendment moved by my hon. Friend, whatever may be thought of it, shows the general feeling of the House, which on more than one occasion has been displayed on various public matters, and my only surprise is that Members of the Government should be surprised that such an Amendment has been put down. If the older Members of the Government who were here before 1892 were in any way in touch with the pulse of the House they would see that this ebullition of feeling in one direction is only natural, and I must say that it is growing more and more, especially so within the last few months. It is felt that the Government are aloof from the feelings of private Members of this House, that they stand alone on a pedestal of their own imagination, unaware of the feeling among private Members, and that they are absolutely out of touch with the feelings of private Members, who, after all, are supposed to be the real power in the House. The Government have an unusual amount of power at the present time, and the more power they obtain the more they will require. That is the danger, and therefore this Debate is only the natural outcome of the feeling which exists. I hope that other private Members will continue voicing this feeling of general reluctance to serve as the galley slaves of the Cabinet. If the Prime Minister wishes to get the general feeling of private Members, and not the feeling of servile and obedient followers of the Government Whips—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh, oh!"]—I withdraw the word "servile," and I withdraw the word "obedient." I merely call attention to the feeling of private Members of this House—let him take off the Government Whips when there is a Division.
§ Mr. PIRIE
My request is granted before it is made, and I am very glad of it. Before a Division is taken, perhaps my hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetland will devise a more popular Amendment [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."]—while maintaining the principle at stake. The appointment of this Committee should not be merely in the hands of the Whips of each party. If private Members are left free to express their 1380 general feeling in the Division Lobby, I believe they might possibly defeat the Government.
§ Lord EDMUND TALBOT
We have no desire to press the nomination of the Whip on this side, and if there is a general opinion that the two Whips should not be on the Committee, we on this side do not wish to raise any objection.
§ Mr. GEORGE ROBERTS
I quite appreciate the right hon. Gentleman's position, and I am sure the House will excuse me if I offer a few observations on the subject. The principle followed in this House is that each party shall have representation proportionate to its number, and the selection of nominees is a matter for the respective parties themselves. In reference to the party with which I am associated, in making a selection we have regard only to the fitness of the Member chosen for the duties which he will have to discharge on the Committee. If one of our party possesses intimate knowledge of the subject to be dealt with by the Committee to be appointed, he is selected. I assume that is the policy pursued by other parties in the House. In the Labour party the officials of that party, who obtain an accurate knowledge of the fitness of a particular Member of it for the duties to be performed, make a recommendation to a meeting of the Labour Members, who approve or reject the recommendation made to them. In this particular it may well happen that the composition of the Committee is not what the House would exactly desire. As the Prime Minister has stated, the House now has the opportunity of voting upon each individual name, and as the Whips are not to be put on it seems to me the desire of the House can very well be made known. As to the method proposed in the Amendment, I must say I cannot regard it as practical as far as I am concerned, and with my colleagues I propose to vote against it.
§ Mr. EUGENE WASON
I am anxious not to allow the remarks of my hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetlands (Mr. Cathcart Wason) to pass without a word of protest. The hon. Member for Huddersfield (Mr. Sherwell) spoke of me as one of the older and weightier Members. When the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Mr. Pirie) says that the object of this Committee is to 1381 put more power into the hands of the Government than they have already got I desire to inform him it is nothing of the sort. It is following on the old procedure, and on the old lines. I agree entirely with the remark that the Whips in their selection of members for Select Committees do endeavour to get the best men they possibly can for those Committees, and that would be impossible if the Amendment were adopted. I have no hesitation whatever, although we are called "Servile and obedient followers of the Government," in saying that I am no more servile and obedient than the hon. Member. I have endeavoured to show why I shall support the Resolution and oppose the Amendment.
§ Mr. LEIF JONES
I should be very sorry to have it supposed that all of us have sympathy with what may be called the universal opinion expressed by some hon. Members. I am one of those who pressed for the appointment of this Committee, and I am grateful to the Government for having agreed to do so. I would remind the House of the purpose of the appointment of the Committee. It is appointed to inquire what alterations, if any, are desirable in the practice and procedure of the House. On a Committee of that kind I submit you must have men who are acquainted with the practice and procedure of the House. For that reason it is absolutely necessary that on that Committee you should have a certain number of men who have been in the House a very long time. In spite of the achievements of the hon. Member for Pontefract (Mr. Booth), I submit that service for a long number of years in the House is necessary for most of us before we can acquire an acquaintance with the meaning of procedure. A Committee of new Members filled with a consciousness of the inconvenience of the present system is by no means the best Committee to inquire and report. It does seem to me what a good many of those who have spoken are asking for is ignorant criticism; and I judge so from their speeches. While I am anxious to have upon the Committee a number of the newer Members of the House to bring that fresh air from outside which they seem to think so desirable to bear on our procedure, and I so far agree with them, I do think it would be a real misfortune if we did not get also on the Committee a number of men who from their use, and even misuse, of the Rules of the House, 1382 know what can be done. I ask the House to look at the Committee. I scrutinised it with great care when the names were put on the Paper. I am exceedingly anxious we should have a strong Committee and a useful report. I do say that the names on the Committee are those of hon. Members who, nearly every one, can bring a real contribution to +he work of the Committee. I look at the names one by one. We have the hon. Baronet the Member for the City (Sir F. Banbury) and the, hon. Member for Pontefract. They have used the rules to the utmost possible extent, and I think any Committee on Procedure without them upon it would really not be fully representative of the House and of the way in which the House uses its rules. I think both should be on the Committee, because it is desirable that you should have the inquiry from the point of view of the Government and the point of view of the Opposition. Therefore I think those two past-masters in the art of making use of the most out-of-the-way rules for their own purposes are very desirable members of the Committee. The hon. Member for Dudley (Sir A. Griffith-Boscawen) is a very old Member of this House.
§ Mr. SPEAKER
If this Amendment is defeated we shall then reach the discussion of the individual names, and that will be a more convenient time to do so.
§ Mr. LEIF JONES
The criticism put forward was that it was not representative of the opinion of the House for this purpose, and I was endeavouring to show that, taking the Members one by one, they really do represent the many points of view, and have a great deal of varied experience. I will not, however, pursue the matter. There are newer Members on it, and you have those elements which enable the Committee to fulfil the purpose for which it is required.
§ Question put, "That the Committee be chosen by ballot from the respective groups in the House in the following proportion: Liberals six, Unionists six, Irish Nationalists two, Irish Independent Party one, and Labour one."
§ The House divided: Ayes, 41; Noes, 178.1383
|Division No. 121.]||AYES.||[12.53 p.m.|
|Beck, Arthur Cecil||Hinds, John||Robinson, Sidney|
|Bryce, John Annan||Hogge, James Myles||Sherwell, Arthur James|
|Burn, Col. C. R.||Hope, Major J. A. (Midlothian)||Spear, Sir John Ward|
|Carr-Gomm, H. W.||Jardine, Sir J. (Roxburgh)||Stewart, Gershom|
|Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich)||Jowett, Frederick William||Sutherland, John E.|
|Cawley, Harold T. (Heywood)||King, Joseph||Whitehouse, John Howard|
|Collins, G. P. (Greenock)||Leach, Charles||Whyte, A. F. (Perth)|
|Craik, Sir Henry||Martin, Joseph||Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud|
|Dickinson, W. H.||Molteno, Percy Alport||Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)|
|Goldsmith, Frank||Nield, Herbert||Winterston, Earl|
|Gretton, John||O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.)||Yate, Colonel C. E.|
|Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds)||Pirle, Duncan, V.|
|Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire)||Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.||TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Cathcart Wason and Sir G. Baring.|
|Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West)||Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)|
|Herbert, Hon. A. (Somerset, S.)||Pringle, William M. R.|
|Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour)||Gulland, John William||Nugent, Sir Walter Richard|
|Acland, Francis Dyke||Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)||O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)|
|Adamson, William||Hackett, John||O'Doherty, Philip|
|Addison, Dr. Christopher||Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)||O'Dowd, John|
|Ainsworth, John Stirling||Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry||O'Grady, James|
|Alden, Percy||Hayden, John Patrick||O'Malley, William|
|Ainstruther-Gray, Major William||Hazleton, Richard||O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.)|
|Arnold, Sydney||Henderson, Arthur (Durham)||O'Shaughnessy, P. J.|
|Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry||Henderson, Major H. (Abingdon)||O'Shee, James John|
|Banbury, Sir Frederick George||Higham, John Sharp||O'Sullivan, Timothy|
|Barnes, George N.||Holmes, Daniel Turner||Pearce, William (Limehouse)|
|Barrie, Hugh T.||Howard, Hon. Geoffrey||Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington)|
|Barton, William||Hughes, Spencer Leigh||Pease, Rt. Hon, Joseph A. (Rotherham)|
|Beale, Sir William Phipson||Illingworth, Percy H.||Phillips, John (Longford, S.)|
|Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets, St. Geo.)||Ingleby, Holcombe||Pointer, Joseph|
|Bird, Alfred||Jones, Rt.Hon.Sir D.Brynmor (Swansea)||Price, Sir Robert J. (Norfolk, E.)|
|Boland, John Pius||Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen, East)||Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields)|
|Booth, Frederick Handel||Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)||Reddy, Michael|
|Bowerman, Charles W.||Jones, W. S, Glyn- (T. H'mts, Stepney)||Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven)|
|Brace, William||Joyce, Michael||Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)|
|Brady, Patrick Joseph||Keating, Matthew||Roberts, George H. (Norwich)|
|Bridgeman, W. Clive||Kellaway, Frederick George||Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs)|
|Brocklehurst, William B.||Kelly, Edward||Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)|
|Burke, E. Haviland-||Kennedy, Vincent Paul||Robertson, John M. (Tyneside)|
|Burns, Rt. Hon. John||Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade)||Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)|
|Campbell, Capt. Duncan F. (Ayr, N.)||Lardner, James C. R.||Roche, Augustine (Louth)|
|Chancellor, Henry George||Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th)||Roe, Sir Thomas|
|Chapple, Dr. William Allen||Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert||Rowlands, James|
|Clough, William||Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich)||Samuel, J. (Stockton)|
|Compton-Rickett, Rt. Hon. Sir J.||Lundon, Thomas||Sanders, Robert Arthur|
|Conden, Thomas Joseph||Lyell, Charles Henry||Sandys, G. J.|
|Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.||Lynch, Arthur Alfred||Schwann, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles E.|
|Cotton, William Francis||Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droitwich)||Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton)|
|Crooks, William||Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester)||Sheehy, David|
|Crumley, Patrick||Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)||Shortt, Edward|
|Cullinan, John||McGhee, Richard||Smith, H. B. Lees (Northampton)|
|Dawes, James Arthur||Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J.||Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim)|
|Delany, William||Macpherson, James Ian||Stanley, G. F. (Preston)|
|Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas||MacVeagh, Jeremiah||Staveley-Hill, Henry|
|Dillon, John||McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald||Steel-Maitland, A. D.|
|Donelan, Captain A.||M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs.,Spalding)||Sutton, John E.|
|Doris, William||M'Micking, Major Gilbert||Talbot, Lord E.|
|Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)||Mallaby-Deely, Harry||Tennant, Harold John|
|Elverston, Sir Harold||Marshall, Arthur Harold||Thompson, Robert (Belfast. North)|
|Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.)||Mason, James F. (Windsor)||Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)|
|Esslemont, George Birnie||Masterman, Rt. Hon. C. F. G.||Toulmin, Sir George|
|Eyres-Monsell, B. M.||Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)||Trevelyan, Charles Philips|
|Falconer, James||Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix)||Walsh, Stephen (Lancs., Ince)|
|Falle, Bertram Godfray||Millar, James Duncan||Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)|
|Ffrench, Peter||Molloy, Michael||Webb, H.|
|Flavin, Michael Joseph||Mooney, John J.||White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston)|
|France, Gerald Ashburner||Morgan, George Hay||White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E.R.)|
|Gilmour, Captain J.||Muldoon, John||White, Patrick (Meath, North)|
|Ginnell, L.||Munro, Robert||Williams, John (Glamorgan)|
|Gladstone, W. G. C.||Murphy, Martin J.||Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glasgow)|
|Glanville, Harold James||Murray, Captain Hon. Arthur C.||Younger, Sir George|
|Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford||Neilson, Francis||Yoxall, Sir James Henry|
|Goldstone, Frank||Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)|
|Greene, Walter Raymond||Nolan, Joseph||TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. Eugene Wason and Mr. Leif Jones.|
|Greig, Colonel J. W.||Norton, Captain Cecil W.|
|Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.)|
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Sir Frederick Banbury be a member of the Committee."
§ Mr. SHERWELL
I beg to oppose the inclusion of the name of Sir Frederick Banbury.
As a matter of personal convenience, if your ruling had allowed it, I should have preferred to move my Amendment as it stands on the Paper—that is, to have moved the exclusion of two names and the substitution of two others. I may state my object in opposing these two names, in order to save repetition when the next name is taken. The hon Baronet (Sir F. Banbury) has an unrivalled knowledge of the rules of procedure of this House, and even of the by-ways of those rules as well of the main roads, but, in my experience of the House during the last seven or eight years, that knowledge has been most skilfully and assiduously used for preventing this House from fulfilling its primary function as a legislative instrument. The hon. Baronet takes the view, which is held by a few other Members, that legislation is in itself an evil, and that this House best fulfils its duty to the country by preventing rather than by enacting legislation. I still think, with all respect, that the country regards this House primarily as a legislative instrument, and wants us to justify our existence by doing good business for the country. My fear is that if the hon. Baronet is elected upon this Committee, his unrivalled knowledge of the rules of procedure will be used with the object of putting forward recommendations which will leave us pretty much where we are to-day in reference to the arrangements for business; and as the real object of the appointment of this Committee is to consider such revision of our rules as will facilitate rather than retard business, I think the hon. Baronet is a most undesirable Member to appoint. In my view, his unrivalled knowledge might be placed at the service of the Committee if the hon. Baronet would take his place in the witness chair. If he gave his views as fully and plainly as he is capable of doing, he would give the Committee and the House the full advantage of his knowledge, without any of those disadvantages which. I am afraid may attend upon his knowledge if he sits as a member of the Committee. I desire as a private Member to enter a very strong protest against the times that are usually chosen by the hon. Baronet and some 1386 other Members for the ingenious exercise of their knowledge. We are all aware that one of the real defects in our procedure is that the existing rules allow of the stultification of the House, particularly on Fridays. The Friday for the greater part of the Session——
§ Mr. SPEAKER
The hon. Member will be entitled to discuss that in the Committee, but it is not relevant to the present Motion.
§ Mr. SHERWELL
I, of course, defer to your ruling, Mr. Speaker, but I thought I might probably indicate to the House the general lines of my objection to the hon. Baronet.
§ Earl WINTERTON
The Motion of the hon. Gentleman does not require a seconder, but I think it is right that some one on this side of the House should state the objections to the hon. Baronet—I need hardly say in no sense personally. My objection is equally strong to the hon. Member (Mr. Booth), whose name will come up next for decision. I agree with everything that has been said by the hon. Member for Huddersfield. What is the object, according to the first part of the Motion, of setting up this Select Committee? It is "to consider and report whether any, and, if so, what alterations are desirable in the practice and procedure of this House with regard to public business." That object will be lost if the Committee contains an hon. Member whose public life in this House has been associated, honourably enough, with attempts to make the procedure more ridiculous than it is at present. I hold, very strongly, that if the procedure of this House, and that if the House of Commons itself, is to have the respect and position it formerly occupied in the opinion of the country, the procedure has got to be drastically amended—the surgeon's knife has got to be applied to the gangrene that is undoubtedly there. Although I would be the last to deny the services of my hon. Friend, and of the hon. Gentleman opposite in some directions, I do not think that they are the doctors to be called in to prescribe for the disease from which the House is suffering. There is at the commencement of the Book of Common Prayer a sentence that applies to the Church of England, which although hon. Members opposite may not agree as applying to the Church of England, yet perhaps will agree with me in applying to the procedure of this House. 1387It bath been the wisdom of the Church of England; ever since the first compiling of her Publick Liturgy, to keep the mean between the two extremes, of too much stiffness in refusing, and of too much easiness in admitting any variation from it.These words, as applied to debate, are what some of us who are anxious to see the procedure of the House amended, are aiming at. We wish to see the balance of power maintained between the Government—whatever Government is in power—which invariably wishes to prevent debate, and the good party men among the Opposition, who invariably wish to prolong it, we wish to see the balance evenly held. We recognise that it is not evenly held. The result is the appalling condition of affairs that has occurred in recent debates. It would not be in order to refer to the Debate in the earlier part of the week, but every private Member who cares for the honour of the House must have been impressed by the speeches on that occasion, and must have realised the need for some drastic treatment. I submit that that drastic treatment can only be carried out by appointing men on the Committee that are not known to be associated with one aspect of the work of the House, and that new aspect of which no Member who really cares for the House of Commons can be particularly proud.
§ Mr. PRINGLE
I beg to support the Amendment, but for different reasons these given, either by my hon. Friend on this side or the Noble Lord. I do not wish to make any disparaging reference to the hon. Baronet, for I agree that there is no man more fully master of the procedure of the House of Commons than he is. Nobody admires his ability on this side of the House more than I do, with the possible exception of the hon. Member for Pontefract. But I would point out that the hon. Baronet is already a Member of two Committees. He is Chairman of the Estimates Committee, and a Member of the Marconi Committee, which has not yet discharged its great duties. [An HON. MEMBER: "And never will."] Under the circumstances it seems to me to be impossible for a Member of this House to discharge the duties adequately and well of another Committee, especially one with a very hard task like this. His nomination by hon. Gentlemen opposite seems to me to argue a lack of ability and talent in the ranks opposite, which we on the Government side would not have liked to attribute to them.
§ Question put, "That Sir Frederick Banbury be a member of the Select Committee."
§ The House divided: Ayes, 145; Noes, 76.1389
|Division No. 122.]||AYES.||[1.13 p.m.|
|Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour)||Doris, William||Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade)|
|Acland, Francis Dyke||Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.)||Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West)|
|Ainsworth, John Stirling||Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.)||Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th)|
|Anstruther-Gray, Major William||Eyres-Monsell, B. M.||Leach, Charles|
|Baird, John Lawrence||Falconer, James||Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert|
|Barrie, H. T.||Falle, Bertram Godfray||Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich)|
|Barton, William||Ffrench, Peter||Lundon, Thomas|
|Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets, S. George)||Flavin, Michael Joseph||Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droitwich)|
|Boland, John Pius||Gilmour, Captain John||McGhee, Richard|
|Booth, Frederick Handel||Ginnell, Laurence||Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J.|
|Brady, Patrick Joseph||Gladstone, W. G. C.||Macpherson, James Ian|
|Bridgeman, William Clive||Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford||MacVeagh, Jeremiah|
|Burke, E. Haviland-||Goldsmith, Frank||McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald|
|Burn, Colonel C. R.||Greene, Walter Raymond||Magnus, Sir Philip|
|Burns. Rt. Hon. John||Greig, Colonel James William||Mallaby-Deeley, Harry|
|Buxton, Rt. Hon. S. C. (Poplar)||Gretton, John||Marshall, Arthur Harold|
|Campbell, Capt. Duncan F. (Ayr, N.)||Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.)||Mason, James F. (Windsor)|
|Carlile, Sir Edward Mildred||Gulland, John William||Masterman, Rt. Hon. C. F. G.|
|Carr-Gomm, H. W.||Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)||Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix)|
|Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich)||Hackett, John||Mooney, John J.|
|Chancellor, Henry George||Haddock, George Bahr||Morgan, George Hay|
|Chapple, Dr. William Allen||Harcourt. Robert V. (Montrose)||Muldoon, John|
|Clough, William||Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)||Munro, Robert|
|Compton-Rickett, Rt. Hon. Sir J.||Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry||Murray, Capt. Hon. Arthur C.|
|Condon, Thomas Joseph||Hayden, John Patrick||Nield, Herbert|
|Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.||Henderson, Major H. (Berks, Abingdon)||Nolan, Joseph|
|Cotton, William Francis||Higham, John Sharp||Norton, Captain Cecil W.|
|Courthope, George Loyd||Hope, Major J. A. (Midlothian)||Nugent, Sir Walter Richard|
|Craik, Sir Henry||Howard, Hon. Geoffrey||O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)|
|Crooks, William||Illingworth, Percy H.||O'Doherty, Philip|
|Crumley, Patrick||Ingleby, Holcombe||O'Dowd, John|
|Cullinan, J.||Jones, Rt.Hon.Sir D.Brynmor (Sw'nsea)||O'Malley, William|
|Dawes, James Arthur||Jones, Leif Stratton (Notts, Rushcliffe)||O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.)|
|Delany, William||Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)||O'Shaughnessy, P. J.|
|Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. S.||Joyce, Michael||O'Shee, James John|
|Dillon, John||Kellaway, Frederick George||O'Sullivan, Timothy|
|Donelan, Captain A.||Kelly, Edward||Paget, Almeric Hugh|
|Pearce, William (Limehouse)||Sheehy, David||Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)|
|Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington)||Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)||Webb, H.|
|Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham)||Spear, Sir John Ward||Wedgwood, Josiah C.|
|Price, Sir Robert J. (Norfolk, E.)||Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)||White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston)|
|Reddy, Michael||Staveley-Hill, Henry||White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E.R.)|
|Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)||Steel-Maitland, A. D.||White, Patrick (Meath, North)|
|Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)||Stewart, Gershom||Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glas.)|
|Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)||Sutherland, John E.||Yate, Col. C. E.|
|Roche, Augustine (Louth)||Talbot, Lord Edmund||Younger, Sir George|
|Roe, Sir Thomas||Tennant, Harold John|
|Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees)||Thompson, Robert (Belfast, North)||TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Eugene Wason and Mr. Lane-fox.|
|Sanders, Robert Arthur||Toulmin, Sir George|
|Scott, A, MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton||Waring, Walter|
|Adamson, William||Holmes, Daniel Turner||Pringle, William M. R.|
|Addison, Dr. Christopher||Hughes, Spencer Leigh||Radford, George Heynes|
|Alden, Percy||Jardine, Sir J. (Roxburgh)||Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields)|
|Arnold, Sydney||Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen, East)||Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven)|
|Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple)||Jones, W. S. Glyn- (Stepney)||Robinson, Sidney|
|Barnes, George N.||Jewett, Frederick William||Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)|
|Bock, Arthur Cecil||Kennedy, Vincent Paul||Rowlands, James|
|Bowerman, Charles W.||King, J.||Schwann, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles E.|
|Brocklehurst, W. B.||Lyell, Charles Henry||Shortt, Edward|
|Bryce, John Annan||Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)||Smith, H. B. Lees (Northampton)|
|Cawley, Harold T. (Heywood)||Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)||Sutton, John E.|
|Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock)||M'Laren, Hon.F.W.S. (Lincs., Spalding)||Thorne, William (West Ham)|
|Denman, Hon. R. D.||M'Micking, Major Gilbert||Walsh, Stephen (Lanes, Ince)|
|Dickinson, W. H.||Martin, Joseph||Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)|
|Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)||Meagher, Michael||Wardle, George J.|
|Elverston, Sir Harold||Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)||Whitehouse, John Howard|
|Esslemont, George Birnie||Millar, James Duncan||Whyte, Alexander F.|
|France, Gerald Ashburner||Molloy, Michael||Wiles, Thomas|
|Glanville, Harold James||Molteno, Percy Alport||Williams, J. (Glamorgan)|
|Goldstone, Frank||Neilson, Francis||Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud|
|Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire)||O'Grady, James||Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)|
|Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)||O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.)||Young, William (Perth, East)|
|Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West)||Phillips, John (Longford, S.)||Yoxall, Sir James Henry|
|Henderson, Arthur (Durham)||Pirie, Duncan V.|
|Herbert, Hon. A. (Somerset, S.)||Pointer, Joseph||TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. Sherwell and Earl Winterton.|
|Hinds, John||Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)|
|Hogge, James Myles|
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Booth be one other member of the Committee."
§ Mr. SHERWELL
I beg to oppose the inclusion of the name of Mr. Booth.
I need not detain the House with any lengthy remarks, because the same general arguments as I used in reference to the name of the hon. Baronet, the Member for the City of London, apply also to the hon. Member for Pontefract. The only difference is that whereas the hon Baronet has a long association with this House, my hon. Friend has contrived by very great skill in a very short space of time to acquire an almost equal mastery of its procedure. It is because I regard that mastery as dangerous in the object, and use made of it characteristically and habitually by my hon. Friend, in concert with the hon. Baronet opposite, that I desire to move the omission of his name.
§ Mr. KING
I desire to associate myself with my hon. Friend, not from any feeling 1390 of animosity towards the Member for Pontefract, but merely from a feeling of my great admiration, and even affection for him. I feel strongly that it can do no good to a man to put him upon a Committee which is already discredited. The hon. Member was born for better and greater things. Moreover, cannot the House see that the storm is rising. On the first Division we only took forty-one into the Lobby, but on the second Division we had very nearly eighty, and I tremble to think what will be the result if this Division takes place. Therefore let my hon. Friend seek refuge while there is yet time, and let him gracefully withdraw his candidature from this Committee. There is only one other point, because I am anxious to come to this Division in which I anticipate a great success. I want to appeal to the Whips on the opposite side, and especially the Whips of the Nationalist party, to follow the excellent example which has been set by the Whips, which I invariably follow. I enjoyed the freedom accorded to me in the two Divisions that have taken place. Let the Whips on the opposite side give a like freedom to 1391 their supporters and they will find that they will be all the more devoted to them when they really want them. With this appeal to the Whips of all parties to unite in giving the House an opportunity of a free decision upon this momentous issue I beg to second the Amendment.
§ Mr. PIRIE
There are a good many reasons why Members are put upon Committees by the Whips. I make a suggestion, possibly the Whips think by putting an hon. Member on the Committee they have discharged an obligation and possibly the Whips may be animated by a desire to square a troublesome man. Let the House judge which is the case. My attitude would be to divide against every one of the names proposed. I still hold, in spite of the assurance of the Prime Minister, that the Whips are not acting so as to leave the House quite free to vote. In the last two Divisions I have heard of the Whips standing in the Lobby and giving the sign of the hand which way to vote. I would remind the Whips that a wink is as good as a nod to a blind horse. Whether the blindness has anything to do with servility or obedience I will leave to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Clackmannan and Kinross (Mr. E. Wason), who is such an eminent authority, and I may say that I shall not follow him in the course he is adopting on this question. There is another instance of how the House is still swayed by a nod or a wink in the Lobby, for I saw a body of men in one Lobby walk out almost like a company of Infantry who had got into the Lobby by mistake, and the Captain ordered them out.
§ Mr. PIRIE
An hon. Member from the Nationalist Benches called out, "Banbury saved by the Irish!" but I think it is important that the public should know exactly what is going on, and for my own part I shall do my best to make known to the public exactly what is taking place in this Whip-ridden House.
§ Mr. BECK
I would like to say a word or two on this Motion, which I intend to support. In this House we represent the public outside. We seem to have got into a very frivolous state of mind, but there are a good many people outside who take a very serious attitude towards the performances of the two hon. Members, one who has just been voted upon (Sir F. 1392 Banbury) and the other who is going to be voted upon (Mr. Booth). There are many of us who have fought Bills through Committee. We have seen these Bills sent up to the other House, and afterwards we find that they are wrecked on the rocks of these two hon. Members. There are people who have devoted years of their lives to the study of questions of great importance to the community, and their efforts are killed simply to amuse these two hon. Members. The Irish Members opposite know their own business, and they may think it wise to alienate the rank and file of the Liberal party by supporting such Motions as these. I feel very strongly on this matter, and I am entitled to speak strongly. Hon. Members below the Gangway may think it wise to alienate the support of many hon. Members who simply voted for the last Motion because they had an idea that they would rather support the Government, although otherwise they might have been inclined to support us. We do take a serious view of a Committee which is supposed to be a body constituted to safeguard our rights, and it is a very serious matter to put on that Committee two men who have wrecked Bill after Bill in this House.
§ Mr. MOONEY
I rise to say that in the last Division I voted for the retention of the name of the hon. Baronet the Member for the City of London (Sir F. Banbury). I was not approached on this matter by any Whip or anybody else, and we voted upon that Motion as individuals and as Members of the House of Commons. Personally, I intend to support the Motion that the hon. Member for Pontefract (Mr. Booth) shall be retained as a Member of the Committee.
§ Sir JOHN JARDINE
I would like to ask your ruling, Mr. Speaker, in regard to the Scottish Bill which is down on the Order Paper. I wish to know whether under any rules the House can sit after five o'clock in order to proceed with that measure?
§ Earl WINTERTON
The Committee which is being proposed will have some very important duties to perform. Already a compliment has been paid to the hon. Member for Pontefract, who has succeeded in a comparatively short membership of the House in making himself fully acquainted with all the rules of procedure, 1393 and obtaining a certain position as a result of that knowledge. The question we have to ask ourselves is whether hon. Members think that the peculiar talents of the hon. Member for Pontefract are best suited for service on a Committee which has to discuss, above everything else, the question how freedom of debate can be restored to the House of Commons. If hon. Members think the hon. Member for Pontefract's talents are suited to such a Committee, then they ought to vote for him, and if they do not think so they should vote for the Amendment moved by my hon. Friend. Hon. Members who make a practice of making themselves acquainted with the rules of procedure and
§ debate are only learning how they can throw sand into the Parliamentary machine, and when you are discussing how to mend that machine it is a mistake to have the sand throwers on the Committee. For these reasons I shall support this Amendment. I do so because the hon. Member for Pontefract is already a member of an important Committee which is now sitting, and his name ought not to, be added to another important Committee.
§ Question put, "That Mr. Booth be one other member of the Committee."
§ The House divided: Ayes, 139; Noes, 79.1395
|Division No. 123.]||AYES.||[1.35 p.m.|
|Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour)||Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)||O'Malley, William|
|Acland, Francis Dyke||Harvey, A, G. C, (Rochdale)||O'Shaughnessy, P. J.|
|Ainsworth, John Stirling||Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)||O'Shee, James John|
|Arnold, Sydney||Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry||O'Sullivan, Timothy|
|Banbury, Sir Frederick George||Hayden, John Patrick||Paget, Almeric Hugh|
|Barton, William||Hazleton, Richard||Pearce, William (Limehouse)|
|Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets, S. George)||Henderson, Major H. (Berks, Abingdon)||Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington)|
|Boland, John Plus||Higham, John Sharp||Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham)|
|Bowerman, Charles W.||Holmes, Daniel Turner||Phillips, John (Longford, S.)|
|Brady, Patrick Joseph||Howard, Hon. Geoffrey||Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)|
|Brocklehurst, William B.||Hughes, Spencer Leigh||Price, Sir Robert J. (Norfolk, E.)|
|Burke, E. Haviland-||Illingworth, Percy H.||Reddy, Michael|
|Burns, Rt. Hon. John||Isaacs, Rt. Hon. Sir Rufus||Redmond, William Archer (Tyrone, E.)|
|Carlile, Sir Edward Hildred||Jones, Rt.Hon.Sir D. Brynmor (Sw'nsea)||Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)|
|Carr-Gomm, H. W.||Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen, East)||Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)|
|Chancellor, Henry George||Jones, Leif Stratten (Notts, Rushcliffe)||Robertson, John M. (Tyneside)|
|Clough, William||Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)||Robinson, Sidney|
|Compton-Rickett, Rt. Hon. Sir J.||Joyce, Michael||Roche, Augustine (Louth)|
|Condon, Thomas Joseph||Kellaway, Frederick George||Roe, Sir Thomas|
|Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.||Kelly, Edward||Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland)|
|Cotton, William Francis||Kennedy, Vincent Paul||Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees)|
|Courthope, George Loyd||Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade)||Sanders, Robert Arthur|
|Crooks, William||Leach, Charles||Sandys, G. J.|
|Crumley, Patrick||Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert||Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton)|
|Cullinan, John||Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich)||Sheehy, David|
|Dawes, J. A.||Lundon, Thomas||Shortt, Edward|
|Delany, William||Lynch, Arthur Alfred||Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)|
|Dillon, John||McGhee, Richard||Spear, Sir John Ward|
|Donelan, Captain A.||Macnamara, Rt. Hon. D. T. J.||Spicer, Rt. Hon. Sir Albert|
|Doris, William||Macpherson, James Ian||Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)|
|Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.)||MacVeagh, Jeremiah||Sutherland, John E.|
|Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.)||Marshall, Arthur Harold||Talbot, Lord Edmund|
|Esslemont, George Birnie||Masterman, Rt. Hon. C. F. G.||Tennant, Harold John|
|Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M.||Meagher, Michael||Toulmin, Sir George|
|Falconer, James||Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)||Trevelyan, Charles Philips|
|Ffrench, Peter||Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix)||Waring, Walter|
|Flavin, Michael Joseph||Molloy, Michael||Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)|
|Gilmour, Captain John||Muldoon, John||Webb, H.|
|Gladstone, W. G. C.||Munro, Robert||Wedgwood, Josiah C.|
|Glanville, Harold James||Murphy, Martin J.||White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston)|
|Goldsmith, Frank||Nolan, Joseph||White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E.R.)|
|Greene, Walter Raymond||Norton, Capt. Cecil W.||White, Patrick (Meath, North)|
|Greig, Colonel lames William||Nugent, Sir Walter Richard||Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glas.)|
|Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.)||O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)||Yoxall, Sir James Henry|
|Gulland, John William||O'Doherty, Philip|
|Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)||O'Dowd, John||TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Eugene Wason and Mr. Mooney.|
|Hackett, John||O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.)|
|Haddock, George Bahr|
|Adamson, William||Barrie, H. T.||Campbell, Capt. Duncan F. (Ayr, N.)|
|Addison, Dr. Christopher||Beck, Arthur Cecil||Cawley, Harold T. (Heywood)|
|Alden, Percy||Brace, William||Chapple, Dr. William Allen|
|Baird, John Lawrence||Bridgeman, William Clive||Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock)|
|Baring, Maj. Hon. Guy V. (Winchester)||Bryce, John Annan||Craik, Sir Henry|
|Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple)||Burn, Colonel C. R.||Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas|
|Barnes, George N.||Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, North)||Dickinson, W. H.|
|Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)||Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droitwich)||Smith, H. B. Lees (Northampton)|
|Elverston, Sir Harold||Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)||Staveley-Hill, Henry|
|Falle, Bertram Godfray||Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)||Stewart, Gershom|
|France, Gerald Ashburner||M'Laren, Hon. F. W. S. (Lincs., Spalding)||Sutton, John E.|
|Gretton, John||M'Micking, Major Gilbert||Thompson, Robert (Belfast, North)|
|Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire)||Martin, Joseph||Walsh, Stephen (Lancs., Ince)|
|Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, W.)||Mason, James F. (Windsor)||Wardle, G. J.|
|Henderson, Arthur (Durham)||Millar, James Duncan||Weston, Colonel J. W.|
|Herbert, Hon. A. (Somerset, S.)||Molteno, Percy Alport||Whitehouse, John Howard|
|Hinds, John||Neilson, Francis||Whyte, Alexander F. (Perth)|
|Hogge, James Myles||Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)||Wiles, Thomas|
|Hope, Major J. A. (Midlothian)||Nield, Herbert||Williams, John (Glamorgan)|
|Ingleby, Holcombe||Nile, Duncan V.||Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud|
|Jardine, Sir John (Roxburghshire)||Pointer, Joseph||Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)|
|Jones, W. S. Glyn- (T. H'mts, Stepney)||Pringle, William M. R.||Yate, Col. C. E.|
|Jowett, Frederick William||Radford, G. H.||Young, William (Perth, East)|
|King, Joseph||Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven)||Younger, Sir George|
|Lane-Fox, G. R.||Roche, Walter F.|
|Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)||Rowlands, James||TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Earl|
|Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th)||Schwann, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles E.||Winterton and Mr. Sherwell.|
|Lyell, Charles Henry|
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That Sir A. Griffith-Boscawen be a member of the Committee."
§ Mr. KING
I intend, if there are others who will go along with me to the Lobby, to divide on every one of these names. It is quite obvious that the object of this, Committee will not be attained unless the names carry the great sense and the weight of the House with them, and the last two Divisions have clearly shown that is not so. I object to the name of the hon. Member for Dudley, because he represents, as few of us do, practically the Front Bench. There is no one between him and the Gentlemen on the Front Opposition Bench. I have nothing against him personally, but I do think that his qualifications for this Committee are not very apparent.
§ Mr. WHYTE
I only desire to say, as one of the malcontents, that I have no intention whatever of continuing opposition right through to each member of the Committee. Those who have spoken against the two names which have been carried have made it perfectly clear what was their object. There was no possibility of any personalities. They were standing up for a principle, and it seems to me it would be a most ridiculous way of stultifying that
§ principle to carry opposition to the length proposed by the hon. Member.
§ Sir GODFREY BARING
I think it would be in some respects an abuse of the procedure of this House to divide against every name, but I shall do my utmost to object of my hon. Friend the Member for Dumfries (Mr. Gulland), because I do not think any official representative ought to be on this Committee.
§ Mr. SHERWELL
I sincerely hope my hon. Friend (Mr. King) will not adhere to his resolution. Those of us who have made objection have done so in a serious spirit, and I, personally, cannot persist in an attitude which would prejudice what is intended to be a, very serious protest.
§ Question put, "That Sir A. Griffith-Boscawen be a member of the Committee."
§ The House divided: Ayes, 194; Noes, 26.1397
|Division No. 124.]||AYES.||[1.46 p.m.|
|Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour)||Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets St. George)||Chancellor, H. G.|
|Acland, Francis Dyke||Boland, John Pius||Chapple, Dr. William Allen|
|Addison, Dr. C.||Booth, Frederick Handel||Clough, William|
|Ainsworth, John Stirling||Brady, Patrick Joseph||Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock)|
|Alden, Percy||Brocklehurst, William B.||Compton-Rickett, Rt. Hon. Sir J.|
|Arnold, Sydney||Bryce, John Annan||Condon, Thomas Joseph|
|Baird, John Lawrence||Burke, E. Haviland-||Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.|
|Banbury, Sir Frederick George||Burn, Colonel C. R.||Cotton, William Francis|
|Baring, Maj. Hon. Guy V. (Winchester)||Campbell, Capt. Duncan F. (Ayr, N.)||Courthope, G. Loyd|
|Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple)||Carlile, Sir Edward Hildred||Craik, Sir Henry|
|Barnes, George N.||Carr-Gomm, H. W.||Crooks, William|
|Barton, William||Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich)||Crumley, Patrick|
|Beck, Arthur Cecil||Cawley, H. T. (Lancs., Heywood)||Cullinan, John|
|Dawes, James Arthur||Kennedy, Vincent Paul||Reddy, Michael|
|Delany, William||Lane-Fox, G. R.||Redmond, William Archer (Tyrone, E.)|
|Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas||Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)||Roberts, Charles H, (Lincoln)|
|Donelan, Captain A.||Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th)||Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)|
|Doris, William||Leach, Charles Henry||Robertson, John M. (Tyneside)|
|Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)||Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert||Robinson, Sidney|
|Elverston, Sir Harold||Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich)||Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)|
|Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.)||Lundon, Thomas||Roche, Augustine (Louth)|
|Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.)||Lynch, A. A.||Roe, Sir Thomas|
|Esslemont, George Birnie||Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droitwich)||Rowlands, James|
|Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M.||Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester)||Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland)|
|Falconer, J.||McGhee, Richard||Sanders, Robert Arthur|
|Falle, Bertram Godfray||Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J.||Sandys, G. J.|
|Fell, Arthur||Macpherson, James Ian||Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton)|
|Ffrench, Peter||MacVeagh, Jeremiah||Sheehy, David|
|Flavin, Michael Joseph||M'Micking, Major Gilbert||Sherwell, Arthur James|
|France, Gerald Ashburner||Magnus, Sir Philip||Shortt, Edward|
|Gilmour, Captain John||Marshall, Arthur Harold||Smith, H. B. Lees (Northampton)|
|Gladstone, W. G. C.||Mason, James F. (Windsor)||Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)|
|Glanville, H. J.||Masterman, Rt. Hon. C. F. G.||Spear, Sir John Ward|
|Goldsmith, Frank||Meagher, Michael||Spicer, Rt. Hon. Sir Albert|
|Greene, Walter Raymond||Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)||Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)|
|Greig, Colonel James William||Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix)||Staveley-Hill, Henry|
|Guest, Hon, Frederick E. (Dorset, E.)||Molloy, Michael||Stewart, Gershom|
|Gulland, John William||Molteno, Percy Alport||Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West)|
|Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)||Morgan, George Hay||Sutherland, John E.|
|Hackett, J.||Morton, Alpheus Cleophas||Talbot, Lord Edmund|
|Haddock, George Bahr||Muldoon, John||Tennant, Harold John|
|Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)||Munro, Robert||Toulmin, Sir George|
|Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)||Murray, Captain Hon. Arthur C.||Trevelyan, Charles Philips|
|Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, W.)||Nield, Herbert||Walsh, Stephen (Lancs., Ince)|
|Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)||Nolan, Joseph||Wardle, George J.|
|Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry||Norton, Captain Cecil W.||Waring, Walter|
|Hayden, John Patrick||Nugent, Sir Walter Richard||Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan)|
|Henderson, Arthur (Durham)||O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)||Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)|
|Henderson, Major H. (Berks, Abingdon)||O'Doherty, Philip||Webb, H.|
|Higham, John Sharp||O'Dowd, John||Weston, Colonel J. W.|
|Hinds, John||O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.)||White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston)|
|Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.||O'Malley, William||White, Sir Luke (York, E.R.)|
|Holmes, Daniel Turner||O'Shaughnessy, P. J.||White, Patrick (Meath, North)|
|Hope, Major J. A. (Midlothian)||O'Shee, James John||Whyte, Alexander F.|
|Howard, Hon. Geoffrey||O'Sullivan, Timothy||Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud|
|Hughes, Spencer Leigh||Paget, Almeric Hugh||Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)|
|Illingworth, Percy H.||Palmer, Godfrey Mark||Winterton, Earl|
|Ingleby, Holcombe||Parker, James (Haliax)||Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glas.)|
|Isaacs, Rt. Hon. Sir Rufus||Pearce, William (Limehouse)||Tate, Colonel C. E.|
|Jones, Rt.Hon.Sir D.Brynmor (Sw'nsea)||Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington)||Young, William (Perth, Cast)|
|Jones, J. Tewyn (Carmarthen, East)||Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham)||Younger, Sir George|
|Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)||Phillips, John (Longford, S.)||Yoxall, Sir James Henry|
|Jones, W. S. Glyn- (T.H'mts., Stepney)||Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.|
|Joyce, Michael||Price, Sir Robert J. (Norolk, E.)||TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Leif Jones and Mr. Gretton.|
|Kellaway, Frederick George||Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel|
|Kelly, Edward||Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields)|
|Adamson, William||Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade)||Radford. George Heynes|
|Bowerman, Charles W.||Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)||Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven)|
|Brace, William||Martin, Joseph||Schwann, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles E.|
|Cowan, William Henry||Millar, James Duncan||Sutton, John E.|
|Dickinson, W. H.||Mooney, John J.||Wiles, Thomas|
|Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)||O'Grady, James||Williams, John (Glamorgan)|
|Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford||Pirie, Duncan V.|
|Goldstone, Frank||Pointer, Joseph||TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. Hogge and Mr. King.|
|Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire)||Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)|
|Jowett, Frederick William||Pringle, William M. R.|
Question, "That Mr. Keir Hardie, Mr. T. M. Healy, Mr. James Hope, Sir David Brynmor Jones, Mr. Swift MacNeill, Mr. Rawlinson, Mr. Wedgwood, and Sir Thomas Whittaker be members of the Committee," put, and agreed to.
§ Mr. SHERWELL
I desire to oppose the inclusion of my hon. Friend the Member for Dumfries (Mr. Gulland).
§ Mr. ILLINGWORTH
On a point of Order. My hon. Friend the Member for Dumfries will certainly withdraw his name, as indicated by the Prime Minister, and I do not move his name.
§ Mr. LEIF JONES
On a point of Order. Is it not open to another Member of the House to move that the hon. Member for Dumfries be a Member of the Committee?
§ Mr. SPEAKER
This Committee is proposed by the Government, and they are responsible for the names. If they do not choose to move that name, there is no power to compel them to do so.
§ Mr. LEIF JONES
Could not the Government propose some other name in place 1399 of that of the hon. Member for Dumfries, and would it not then be open to any hon. Member to move as an Amendment that he be a member of the Committee?
§ Mr. SPEAKER
The hon. Member would first have to obtain his assent. That might not be so easily obtained.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Robert Harcourt be a member of the Committee."
§ Mr. KING
On a point of Order. The Resolution has been passed stating that the Committee should consist of sixteen members, but only fourteen names have been added to it. I should like to ask the Government or you, Sir, what is the position in which we stand. How is that inconsistency to be overcome?
§ Ordered, That a Select Committee be appointed to consider and report whether any and, if so, what alterations are desirable in the practice and procedure of this House with regard to public business:
§ Ordered, that the Committee do consist of Sixteen Members:
§ Ordered, That Sir Frederick Banbury, Mr. Booth, Sir Arthur Griffith-Boscawen, Lord Hugh Cecil, Mr. Dillon, Mr. Robert Harcourt, Mr. Keir Hardie, Mr. T. M. Healy, Mr. James Hope, Sir David Brynmor Jones, Mr. Swift MacNeill, Mr. 1400 Rawlinson, Mr. Wedgwood, and Sir Thomas Whittaker be members of the Committee:
§ Ordered, That the Committee have power to send for persons, papers, and records:
§ Ordered, That the Committee have power to report from time to time:
§ Ordered, That Five be the quorum. [Mr. Illingworth.]