§ Mr. GWYNNEI should like, with the permission of the House, to make a statement of a personal nature. The House may remember that on Tuesday night, on the Adjournment of the House, I raised 651 the question of the absence from this House of the hon. Member (Mr. Martin), due to the fact that he had left this country not intending to return, and I asked a question of the Prime Minister, who was unable to be present, but in his stead the Home Secretary got up to reply, and although he did not reply to my question, he did make a personal attack on myself. I do not attach very much importance to it myself, but I think it is a bad precedent for right hon. Gentlemen on the Front Bench.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThis is not an opportunity for lecturing the Front Bench. There are plenty of other occasions for that. If the hon. Member rises to make a personal statement, he can make his personal statement without criticising others.
§ Mr. GWYNNEI am trying to make a personal statement, and I am challenged by hon. Members. The facts are quite clear. The right hon. Gentleman stated that during the last two and a half years, although I have drawn £1,000 from the State, I had kept 263 Divisions out of 687, and that being a thoroughly conscientious Gentleman, as he held me to be, I would, no doubt, return £600 for having kept so few Divisions. He went on to say that people who came into Court must come with clean hands, and as the hon. Member (Mr. Martin) had kept a great many more Divisions than I had, I was not justified in raising his case. In every instance the right hon. Gentleman was inaccurate. The facts are as follows: During the last two and a half years, instead of having kept 263 Divisions I had kept 650. Instead of having kept fewer Divisions than the hon. Member I kept 650 and he has kept 474, a third again as many as he has. So far as that particular day was concerned when the right hon. Gentleman said I had not been attending I had been in the House the whole day and had voted in all Divisions except one. Again he is inaccurate there. As regards being a conscientious gentleman and returning that portion of my salary, I should be perfectly willing, if the right hon. Gentleman really thinks Divisions in this House make up for attendance, to return my portion, which I work out as being something like £200, on the condition that the right hon. Gentleman on the Front Bench will do the same. I would only warn them that some right hon. Gentleman would have to return 652 £9,000. I feel sure that even hon. Members opposite will think one is justified in correcting a statement which was grossly inaccurate, which I feel sure the right hon. Gentleman would be the first to wish to do in justice to myself or any other Member. I cannot think that his intention was to grossly misrepresent my attendance in the House, and Gentlemen on the opposite side of the House will, I feel sure, admit that however much they may disapprove of my work here, at any I rate I am certainly regular in my attendance.
§ Mr. McKENNAIf I have mis-stated the number of the hon. Member's attendances I can only express my extreme regret, and assure him that the figures were handed to me, and I gave them to the House in good faith.
§ Mr. ORMSBY-GOREThe Church at Cardiff lie about that.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI must ask the hon. Member for Denbigh Boroughs to control himself.
§ Mr. McKENNAThe hon. Member has had an opportunity of examining the figures, and I accept his statement without any qualification or reserve of any kind except this, that if he turns to the discussion he will see that I qualified the statement as to figures by referring to those Divisions which were trials of strength between the parties. I have no doubt that modification would not make any substantial difference in the figures.
§ Mr. GWYNNEI do not wish to contradict the right hon. Gentleman, but I have read through very carefully this morning the whole speech, and there was no question of qualification at all. To clear up all mystery I will read what he said:—
I will give the case of the hon. Member for Eastbourne. During the last two and a-half years, in which the Member for Eastbourne has drawn from the State £1,000, he has voted in 263 Divisions out of 687.He went on again to repeat:—It so happens that the hon. Gentleman who makes this objection has voted 263 times in the last two and a-half years."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 21st July, 1914, col. 414.]There is no qualification at all. It is quite definite.
§ Mr. McKENNAMy use of those words is very strong in my own memory. I accept the hon. Gentleman's statement. I really admit that the qualification would only make a very small difference.