QUESTION—OBSERVATIONS. (Hansard, 4 March 1890)

§ EARL BEAUCHAMP
It is not my fault that this question was not put to Her Majesty's Government some days ago; but it has been postponed for the return of the noble Marquess the Prime Minister, whom we are all, I am sure, glad to see among us again with renewed health and vigour. The question is a very simple one. It is to ask Her Majesty's Government what course they propose to take in this House in reference to the Report of the Special Commissioners appointed under the Special Commission Act 1888. I am not going to refer in any way to the circumstances which called forth that Act, but your Lordships will remember that under it three eminent Judges were appointed to decide the matters referred to them. Those eminent Judges have applied themselves during the greater part of two years with the utmost public spirit, ability, and energy to the discharge of the duties which were entrusted to them, as mani- 1765 fested by their Report. That Report has been presented to the House of Commons, and it has been presented to your Lordships. I understend that in another place (as I learn from, perusing the Parliamentary Notices) that a most wise and temperate Motion has been moved by the First Lord of the Treasury; and it appears to me that if it is right and proper that the House of Commons should take notice of that Report, it would be an abdication of your Lordships' functions if you did not also pronounce an opinion upon the subject. It seems to me that the Report, being as it is a Report to both Houses of Parliament, challenges an expression of opinion from both Houses. I might even say that I think the labour and pains which the three Judges have bestowed upon the matter deserve an expression of thanks from this House in the most formal manner, and I do not know any reason which can be alleged why your Lordships should not take action in the matter. If, indeed, the three Judges had been appointed under a Resolution of the House of Commons, it would then have been a matter entirely under the cognisance of the House of Commons, or if the matters referred to the Judges had concerned only the conduct of Members of the House of Commons, then, perhaps, a reason would have existed for your Lordships not interfering in the matter. But your Lordships must remember that the matters referred to the Judges were not merely limited to the conduct of certain Members of the House of Commons, but other persons, too, were implicated, and their conduct also was referred to the Judges for investigation. It appears to me, therefore that your Lordships would be failing in part of your duty if you did not take some action in the matter. It is therefore that I ask Her Majesty's Government, to whom we naturally look for guidance in these matters, what course they intend to pursue with respect to the Re port of the Special Commissioners appointed, under the Act of 1888?

§ THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY)
I concur with my noble Friend in saying that the Report prepared in obedience to the prescription of both Houses of Parliament, the result of so 1766 much labour and energy, ought not to be passed by on the part of the House of Lords without notice. But the position of the two Houses is not exactly the same in respect to this Report. It deals very largely with imputations made against Members of the other House of Parliament. I do not know that there is any Member of your Lordships' House in that position, and, therefore, it is natural that the House of Commons should first deal with that Report, and I think, as a mere matter of courtesy, it is well that we should allow the House of Commons to take what action it thinks best before we move in the matter. I suppose the House of Commons will come to some decision in the matter, and I see no reason why, as far as I know, the action of this House should differ materially from the action of the House of Commons.

§ EARL GRANVILLE
Do I understand the noble Marquess rightly that it is proposed by Her Majesty's Government to recommend this House to do not what is now proposed to be done in the House of Commons, but anything which may be settled by the House of Commons which takes the same line?

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
That, perhaps, would be a bold promise. It might be a safe one, but I do not think I have ventured so far as that. The only thing is, we shall not resolve upon the Motion which we shall ask your Lordships to accept until we have seen what the action of the House of Commons is.