Lords Sitting of 27 July 1896

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

  COMMONS REGULATION (DAEWEN) PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
  THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (VISCOUNT CROSS)THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (VISCOUNT CROSS) moved:—
  "That the order made on the 16th day of March last, That no Bill brought from the House of Commons confirming any Provisional Order or Provisional Certificate shall be read a Second time after Tuesday the 23rd day of June next,' be dispensed with, and that the Bill be read 2a."
  He observed that the Board of Agriculture were sincerely to be congratulated on having brought a difficult matter, which had occupied a long time, to a very satisfactory conclusion.
  Motion agreed to.
  Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

QUEEN'S REIGN.
LORD BRAYEasked the Government whether, inasmuch as on Wednesday, September 23rd next, the Queen would have reigned, D.V., more days than any other Sovereign of this Realm, in honour of such an auspicious and extraordinary event, they would introduce a Measure to constitute for this year only September 23 a holiday in the same sense as December 26 and certain other days were kept as holidays annually. The noble Lord quoted from a letter he addressed to The Times of September 2, 1885, advocating that the Queen's Jubilee should be celebrated in a manner suitably commemorative of a noble reign; and also from a letter he sent to the Press on September 21, 1895, calling attention to the fact that on the 23rd of
670
that month in the ensuing year the Queen would have reigned longer than any other Sovereign over the English people. He observed that, whatever celebrations or rejoicings might be reserved for the next year, it appeared to him fitting that the particular day on which Her Majesty would have reigned for a longer period than any other Sovereign of the Realm should be kept as a Bank Holiday. He observed that he should like to read two letters which were addressed by him to the public newspapers some years ago, which had a distinct bearing upon the subject of his Question. The motives which led him to propose the celebration of the Queen's Jubilee were precisely the same as those which prompted his present Question:—He addressed the following letter to The Times of September 2, 1885:—
"Sir,—Yet ten months and Queen Victoria (D.V.) will enter her year of jubilee. For celebrating such an event, it would seem fitting that long preparations should be made, not only in the United Kingdom, but throughout the Empire.
When George III. entered the 50th year of his reign, in 1809, great rejoicings took place in London, debtors were freed from prison, processions, attended by the King in person, were made to St. Paul's, and when the celebration in England had been concluded, it was renewed with extraordinary splendour in India the following year. An eye-witness has just described to me the ceremony at Windsor, where George III. and Queen Charlotte appeared on the terrace amid the cheers of the people. How few living can recollect that day.
If, then, such an event was kept with due honour, with so much more honour should Her Majesty's jubilee be observed, as her reign has surpassed in magnificence the reigns of all her predecessors.
If we place noble monuments on sites that can only be approached by many steps, in point of time are scarce ten months too long to prepare by degrees for the keeping of so glorious a year?
That year—namely, 1886—will be the 300th anniversary of the condemnation to death of Queen Mary Stuart by the last of our English Sovereigns—Elizabeth. Since Elizabeth, no monarch of purely English blood has occupied the English throne; while, on the other hand, the line of Mary Stuart has never ceased to be Sovereign until it has become most precious to us in the person of that great woman and great ruler, our present Queen.
England, scotland, Wales, and Ireland, all four should vie with each other in this celebration. These, as four horses of widely varying tendency and mettle, are attached to the car of the British State. Of all metaphors, the reins of government in the hands of a ruler is the

671
most frequent. Way we extend it and say that in our Sovereign's hand those reins have been held with a skill as marvellous as the difference is great between four peoples of divergent race and ambition.
It would be hard to number the motives which must suggest themselves both to the national and to the Imperial mind for the keeping of the jubilee with honour worthy—they surely must be without number, yet the chief of all must be the sense of gratitude for a co-existence of religious and political liberty unknown outside our Empire.
That such a state of liberty has been brought about by the genius of the British peoples is a commonplace of history. It deserves to be also a commonplace, that it has been advanced by the genius of that exalted person, who for all but seven times seven years has guided our destinies."
All these suggestions were more than carried out, and it had occurred to him that this more extraordinary event even than the Jubilee should he celebrated. Of course, it was not until next year that the sixtieth year of Her Majesty's reign would be completed; nevertheless, on the 23rd September the Queen would have reigned longer, in point of days, than any other sovereign of these realms. He, therefore, on September 21st, 1895. addressed the following letter to The Tablet—

THE QUEEN'S SEXAGESIMAL.
"SIR,—Encouraged by the recollection of the outburst of loyalty which attended the celebration of the Queen's Jubilee, I venture to call attention to the advent of another and still more glorious occasion of Imperial rejoicing in the near future.
"D.V., on September 23 next year our beloved Queen will have reigned longer than any other Sovereign over the English people.
"May I, therefore, in a Catholic paper, as a Catholic conscious of the unspeakable blessings which, have surrounded our religious liberties during their growth beneath the rule of the House of Hanover, be permitted to call public attention to the hope that the Queen's Sexagesimal (if I may so term it) may be celebrated duly and gratefully throughout the length and breadth of the land?
"On September 2nd, 1886, The Times published a letter of mine advocating the observance of Her Majesty's Jubilee year—1886. It is true that the suggestion was followed out not in the fiftieth (i.e., Jubilee year, 1886) but in the fifty-first year, 1887; nevertheless with a splendour and fitting magnificence that had had on parallel in modern chronicles.
"In the Catholic press and from Catholic circles let the present suggestion first come forth. A year's preparation and a year's consideration is scarcely ton long a period for the development of such a project—which is
672
nothing less than the keeping of the sixtieth year of the most glorious reign written on the page of history."
The year on which he ventured to make these remarks was nearly brought to a close. It appeared to him it would be fitting, whatever celebration or rejoicing might be reserved for next year, that the particular day on which Her Majesty had reigned longer than any other sovereign of England, should be kept as a Bank Holiday.
THE PRIME MINISTER (The MARQUESS of SALISBURY): I hope the noble Lord will forgive me if I do not follow him throughout the whole of the considerations with which he dealt in his observations. I need not say that I imagine the whole House sympathises very deeply with the feelings which induced him to make this suggestion and with the thoughts by which those feelings were excited. But it is a subject obviously of an exceedingly delicate character, and I think the noble Lord will pardon me if I confine myself to the strictly business aspect of his suggestion. A holiday is practically impossible, or exceedingly difficult, unless it is a Bank Holiday. A Bank Holiday cannot be executed except by an Act of Parliament, and the noble Lord may have noticed that in this year and at the present time of the year the passage of an Act of Parliament is not exceedingly easy. I do not mean to say that this business ground is the only ground which weighs in my mind against the proposal of the noble Lord, but I think it is adequate. I think if it should please Parliament to give effect to its loyal sentiments in this particular manner, that the birthday of Her Majesty next year will be a more fitting occasion than the date to which the noble Lord has referred. But in any case the practical objections are very strong and I fear it would be impossible, while sympathising with the feelings of the noble Lord, to adopt his suggestion.

LONDON UNIVERSITY COMMISSION BILL [H.L.]
Considered in Committee (according to Order). Bill reported without Amendment. Standing Committee negatived; and Bill to be read 3a on Thursday next.
COLLECTING SOCIETIES BILL.
Read 2a (according to Order); and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.
FRIENDLY SOCIETIES BILL.
Read 2a (according to Order); and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

LABOUBERS (IRELAND) BILL.
Second Reading (which stands appointed for this day) put off to Thursday next.
House Adjourned at a Quarter before Five o'clock, till Tomorrow, Eleven o'clock.