§ Bill reported, without Amendment.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the third time."
§ Mr. HOGGEWe are being asked at this hour—on Thursday morning—to take the Third Reading of so important a measure, which we have been trying to Amend in Committee. I do appeal to the President of the Local Government Board to carry out the promise made by the Patronage Secretary that if we did not get the Bill yesterday it should be taken on Friday. We began the discussion of the Committee stage on Wednesday; it is now Thursday, and as the Bill was not concluded last night I think he ought to carry out his intention that it should be taken on Friday.
§ Lord EDMUND TALBOT (Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury)I have no recollection of having said that, but if he says I said it, of course I will keep my word.
§ who shall constitute their governors in municipal matters in the immediate future.
§ Question put, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 69; Noes, 7.
465| Division No. 61.] | AYES. | [12.6 a.m. |
| Agg-Gardner, Sir James Tynte | Gibbs, Col. George Abraham | Parker, James (Halifax) |
| Baird, John Lawrence | Gilbert, James Daniel | Pease, Rt. Hon. H. P. (Darlington) |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Gilmour, Lt.-Col, John | Pennefather, De Fonblanque |
| Barlow, Sir Montague (Salford, S.) | Gretton, John | Pollock, Sir Ernest Murray |
| Barnett, Capt. Richard W. | Hambro, Angus Valdemar | Pratt, John W. |
| Barnston, Major Harry | Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Luton, Beds.) | Pryce-Jones, Col. Sir E. |
| Barton, Sir William | Harris, Sir Henry P. (Paddington, S.) | Pulley, C. T. |
| Bathurst, Col. Hon. A. B. (Glouc., E.) | Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry | Rea, Walter Russell |
| Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W. | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Rees, Sir J. D. |
| Boscawen, Sir Arthur Griffith- | Jones, Wm. S. Glyn- (Stepney) | Robinson, Sidney |
| Bridgeman, William Clive | Lane-Fox, Major G. R. | Samuels, Arthur W. (Dub. U.) |
| Bryce, John Annan | Larmor, Sir J. | Sanders, Col. Robert Arthur |
| Butcher, Sir J. G. | Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Bootle) | Smith, Harold (Warrington) |
| Carew, Charles R. S. (Tiverton) | Layland-Barratt, Sir F. | Strauss, E. A. (Southwark, W.) |
| Cator, John | Levy, Sir Maurice | Ward, W. Dudley (Southampeon) |
| Cecil, Rt. Hon. Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert | Weston, John W. |
| Coats, Sir Stuart (Wimbledon) | Lloyd, George Butler (Shrewsbury) | Whiteley, Sir H. J. (Droitwich) |
| Colvin, Col. | M'Curdy, Charles Albert | Wilson, Rt. Hon. J. W. (Worcs., N.) |
| Craig, Ernest (Crewe) | Marshall, Arthur Harold | Wilson-Fox, Henry (Tamworth) |
| Davies, David (Montgomery Co.) | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Winfrey, Sir R. |
| Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.) | Mason, Robert | Younger, Sir George |
| Dawes, James Arthur | Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred Moritz | |
| Fisher, Rt. Hon. William Hayes | Morison, Thomas B. (Inverness) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Lord |
| France, Gerald Ashburner | Newman, Sir Robert (Exeter) | E. Talbot and Colonel Gibbs. |
| NOES | ||
| Booth, Frederick Handel | Martin, Joseph | Watt, Henry A. |
| Hogge, J. M. | Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.— |
| Jowett, Frederick William | Raffan, Peter Wilson | Mr. Pringle and Mr. Sherwell |
§ Mr. HOGGEIt may have been a misunderstanding, but I was informed by my Friends in the Lobby that it was so. As the Patronage Secretary knows, nobody more than myself appreciates the way in which he keeps any bargain he makes with any Member of this House. I have made as many arrangements with him as most people, and I willingly pay this tribute to him, that I do not know any member of the Government or of any Government who so implicitly keeps every promise that he makes to Members. Therefore, I was not seeking to imply to him a promise which he did not make. I was distinctly given to understand from the conversation I had with my hon. and learned Friend (Mr. Watt) in the Lobby that such a promise had been given. The hon. and learned Member is in constant attendance, and he was under the impression that the promise was made. He said that if we got through the Committee stage we should not have to wait very long, as the Bill was to stand over until Friday. Even if there was a misunderstanding, why not take the Bill on Friday? There are only several small 467 measures for Friday, and there is no reason why we should proceed with it tonight. If we do, seeing that we have all lost our trains now, there is more time to discuss it than we would have in an ordinary sitting.
§ Mr. BOOTHI am afraid I was unwittingly to blame for this misunderstanding. Certainly the Patronage Secretary did not say he did not want the Third Reading to-night. I happened to ask him—and he is always very courteous with any Member who goes to him—what was the business on Friday, and he mentioned one or two Bills. He also said that if this Bill was not finished to-night it would have to be taken on Friday. So far as I am concerned, I do not think we ought to take advantage of the position, and I suggest that we give way and allow the Bill to pass.
§ Mr. WATTMay I explain my position? I was under the impression that the 468 Patronage Secretary had said that if the Bill was not passed last night (Wednesday) it would have to be dealt with on Friday. It was a misunderstanding. I do not insist upon the Patronage Secretary keeping a promise he never made, and I suggest that we should allow the Bill to go through.
§ Question put, and agreed to.
§ Bill accordingly read the third time, and passed.
§ The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.
§ It being after Half-past Eleven of the clock on Wednesday evening, Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER adjourned the House, without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
§ Adjourned at Twenty minutes after Twelve o'clock.