§ 68. Sir J. BUTCHERasked the Prime Minister whether he would reconsider the present system under which the House of Lords were able to appoint Committees of Inquiry against the wishes of the Government and of the House of Commons, as in the Douglas-Pennant case, and thereby to incur large expenditure and throw heavy burdens on the public purse?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWAs I stated on the 10th December last this raises a very big constitutional question, and I do not think it is possible to deal with it by question and answer.
§ Sir J. BUTCHERWill the right lion. Gentleman give an undertaking to deal with the grave anomaly of the House of Lords appointing a Committee, and being able to throw heavy burdens on the public purse?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI cannot give that undertaking; I do not think it would be proper to do so. My own impression is that what has happened is calculated to make such a thing less likely to happen again.
§ 69. Sir J BUTCHERasked the Prime Minister the total cost thrown on the public purse by the House of Lords Committee on the ease of Miss Violet Douglas Pennant, including the costs to be paid by the Treasury of the officers against whom unfounded charges were made; whether he would state under what Votes each portion of this cost would fall; and whether the House of Commons would have an opportunity of discussing these Votes?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI would refer to my reply on the 10th instant to the hon. and gallant Member for North Islington. No further opportunity will arise of discussing the Votes referred to unless, owing to 1012 the existing provision on those Votes being insufficient, it becomes necessary to present a Supplementary Estimate.
§ Sir J. BUTCHERAm I right in supposing that £10,000 was the total cost, including the cost to officers, that the public will have to pay?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI require notice of that question.