HL Deb 22 May 1882 vol 269 cc1245-8
THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORD

, who had a Notice on the Paper— To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the negotiations connected with the understanding known as the Treaty of Kilmainham have been brought to a conclusion; and whether Her Majesty's Government will, according to the usual practice, lay Papers on the Table of the House, said, that in consequence of the statement which he understood had been made by the Prime Minister in "another place," he wished to postpone his Question until after the Whitsuntide Recess. He hoped, however, that by that time, when he should again put the Question, information on the two points raised would be forthcoming.

EARL GRANVILLE

I wish to ask the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Waterford) whether his Question after the Vacation will be in the same terms as the one standing in his name on the Notice Paper, inasmuch as a precisely similar Question has been placed on the Notice Paper of the House of Commons, and has not been allowed to be asked by the Speaker?

THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORD

I have given Notice of another.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

It seems to me to be irregular on the part of the noble Earl opposite (Earl Granville) to discuss the terms of a Motion which has not been brought before the House.

EARL GRANVILLE

In order to put myself in Order I shall move the adjournment of the House. I think we ought to have the Notice before us. I must say I read the Notice on the Paper with intense surprise, especially as coming from one who has addressed the House several times within the last two years on the subject of Ireland, sometimes with warmth, but always with earnestness and dignity. I certainly was surprised, then, at the terms of the Notice, and I asked whether it was one which would have been permitted to be presented in the House of Commons; and the answer I received was that a Notice in exactly the same terms as that proposed by the noble Marquess had been prevented by the Speaker from being presented in such terms. Therefore, I think I am quite in Order in the course I have taken, and that I am doing a service to the dignity of this House in making a remonstrance against the Notice of the noble Marquess as it stands. I do not believe the noble Marquess to be the author of the Question. I feel pretty sure that it proceeds from other quarters.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

My Lords, it appears to me to be a most unfortunate and irregular proceeding for the noble Earl opposite (Earl Granville) to raise this discussion at a time when the Notice itself is not under the consideration of the House. I am entirely unable to agree with the noble Earl in the estimate he has formed of the terms of that Notice. I will not undertake to answer for every word of it; but it appears to me that it expresses very fairly the very anomalous position in which the House and the country have been placed by the action of Her Majesty's Government. It points out, as far as I can judge, an analogy which, it appears to me, is quite applicable, and which it is important, I think, that the country should not forget, and which the Government itself has been unwittingly drawn into in this matter. The inconvenience of the course taken by the noble Earl is that the remarks he has made open up the whole question of the policy and conduct of Her Majesty's Government, which requires serious and careful discussion in a House very differently constituted from that we now see before us, when there are very few Peers present. But I confess that it appears to me that the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Waterford) is quite right in speaking of this as an understanding, as he has done, and in pointing out that it is a Treaty that has been made with an alien Power—made with a Power that, at any rate, relies upon alien support for its resources—with a Power whose objects are not the objects of England, but whose objects are inconsistent with the interests of England. I demur entirely to the irregular course which, it seems to me, the noble Earl has taken, and I am bound to say that I am unable to concur with him in saying that the terms of the Question inadequately represent the real facts of the case, or are in any way inconsistent with the ordinary form observed by your Lordships' House. I do not desire to deal at any greater length with the whole of the questions which the terms of the Notice raises. They are fitted to be brought before a larger House, and to be commented upon with more detail and ceremony than can now be bestowed on them; and, when we consider their numbers, to be brought fully before the attention of the people whose interests they are intended to preserve.

EARL GRANVILLE

My Lords, I rise to move that this House do adjourn until Thursday, the 1st of June; and I will take this opportunity of stating that it appears to me that I was perfectly regular, and that the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Salisbury) has committed exactly the same irregularity of which he complains. We have no one here to regulate the proceedings of this House, or guide us in difficulties. In the House of Commons the Speaker discharges that function with great ad- vantage; but here the proceedings are regulated by the order of the House itself. I was perfectly entitled, in regard to a matter which had been ruled by the Speaker in the House of Commons, to say that the Notice was one which was improper to be given, and I was perfectly in Order when I asked the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Waterford) whether his Notice was in the same words as the Notice ruled by Mr. Speaker to be improper or not. Because, certainly, it would have been my duty, if he had answered in the affirmative, to have given Notice that I should move the House not to allow the Question to be put in that shape. I do not see what other course I could have taken. I was perfectly regular in the course I was taking; but the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Salisbury) rushes in and takes upon himself the paternity of the objectionable Notice and defends it, and then he reproaches me with the irregularity which he alleges I have committed, when he himself has been guilty of the grossest irregularity. I must say that, in my opinion, I should be entirely justified and supported by the good feeling and good sense of the House in taking the steps I proposed to take in regard to the Question, of which the noble Marquess is himself, possibly, the author, and to which he seems to have not the slightest objection, but rather to be desirous to give it his full and cordial support. I must also say, when I just now said that I thought the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Waterford) had put the Notice on the Paper inadvertently, and that he was not the author of it, I was quite justified in my statement. The noble Marquess has had the good feeling and good sense to change his Notice, and give one which is entirely unobjectionable.

Moved, "That this House, on rising, do adjourn to Thursday the 1st of June next."—(The Earl Granville.)

On question, agreed to.

House adjourned accordingly at half past Seven o'clock, to Thursday the 1st of June next, at a quarter past Four o'clock.