entitled to leave the Chair without Question being put? SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL: We are discussing whether it is, or is not, necessary to bring on these Motions before Supply; and it appears to me that, as the law has already been broken by the late Government MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is now travelling from the Question before the House. SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL: Then I will not pursue the matter further. question now before the House was a very different one. Everybody, he thought, would admit that, although, as a matter of strict construction, it might be legal to spend money without having got the antecedent consent of the House, yet the Government were bound, at the earliest moment after they had taken a step which was at least doubtful, to come before Parliament and obey the spirit of the Act. This was simply what the Government proposed to do now, and this course was in accordance with Constitutional practice. What was the objection raised on the opposite side? It was that the noble Lord the late Secretary of State for India (Lord Randolph Churchill) was not in his SIR R. ASSHETON CROSS said, that the Prime Minister had not mentioned all the courses which might have been adopted. In his opinion, it would have been a much more convenient-and not at all unusual-course to have been pur-place. Well, whose fault was that? sued if the right hon. Gentleman had made a Motion that all the Orders of the Day after the first Order should be postponed; and then, after the House had gone into Committee of Supply for either a long or a short time, he might have moved to report Progress in order to discuss this question. Such a course would not have broken either the spirit or the letter of the law. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Mr. CHARLES RUSSELL) said, he understood that the Motion was a regular one, according to the construction placed by the Speaker on the 21st Standing Order. The other point raised by his hon. and learned Friend (Sir Richard Webster) was that there was no immediate necessity or urgency for the Motion according to his interpretation of the 55th section. of the Act 21 & 22 Vict. A question which was greatly discussed during the Attorney Generalship of the late Sir John Holker was as to how far that Statute permitted the Government to spend money without having obtained the previous consent of Parliament; and he owned that there was a considerable difficulty in regard to the construction of the Statute. On the whole, he came to the conclusion-and he still adhered to it that the argument of Sir John Holker at the time the question was raised was a sound one as a matter of legal construction; for he (the Attorney General) conceived it was impossible not to see that cases would arise in which some steps involving an expenditure of money might be taken under Section 54 before it was possible to obtain the consent of the House of Commons. But the Mr. Speaker The noble Lord knew very well that the question would be brought forward, for he had the information given him on Thursday; but, instead of being in his place to discuss it—a matter which the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach) thought so important-he had gone on a war expedition of another kind. There was no violation of the true spirit of the order of procedure in the course which the Government proposed to adopt on the present occasion; and he submitted that they were bound to take the earliest moment they could to communicate to the House the steps they had taken, and to obtain the consent of the House. In doing so, they simply obeyed the evident spirit of the Statute as it occurred to him. SIR JOHN GORST said, he was rather disposed to agree with the hon. and learned Attorney General that it was the duty of Her Majesty's Government to come forward, at the first possible moment, to ask for a Resolution of this kind; but why, if they had wished to do so, did they not come forward last Friday? It was true that by a Standing Order Supply must be the first Order on a Friday; but the Government did not scruple to override a Standing Order for their own convenience, and they might have done it on Friday. They might just as well have overridden the Standing Order then as now; or they might have allowed the Committee of Supply to go on in its usual course till half-past 6 or 7 o'clock, and then have brought this Motion forward. The Speaker had ruled that the Motion was not in violation of the letter of the Standing Order; but would any hon. Member venture to assert that it was not contrary to the spirit of that Order? He protested against the postponement of Supply. Question put, and agreed to. He added that it was his intention, unless I wrote in reply to him that I accepted that offer, to lay a Paper containing the plans of the late Government upon the Table of the House on Thursday at the opening of the Session before the commencement of Business. At that moment or at least within two or three hours afterwards-I was expecting the usual communication with respect to the Speech from the Throne which, by the courtesy of the Government, is made SUPPLY [19TH FEBRUARY]. Mr. MARJORIBANKS and Mr. JACKS, Two of the Tellers in the Division upon Friday last upon Vote 15 in Committee of Supply, came to the Table and ac-known to the Leader of any Party; and quainted the House that they had erroneously reported the number of Noes as 136 instead of 146, which was the proper number corresponding with the Division List. Ordered, That the Clerk do correct the said error in the Journal of this House by stating the number of Noes as 146 instead of 136. "That a Select Committee be appointed to consider the question of Procedure in the House of Commons, and to report as to the amendment of existing Rules, and upon any New Rules which they may consider desirable for the efficient despatch of business," said: The objcet of the Motion which I make to-night upon exceptional grounds -and it is a Motion of considerable urgency with regard to the Business of the House is to give the best expedition and despatch that it is in the power of the Government to give to the examination of a question which has, I trust, ceased in substance to be a controversy between the two most numerous Parties in this House. I had better refer to what has taken place with regard to the subject during the course of the present Session. On the evening preceding the delivery of the Queen's Speech I received a courteous communication from the right hon. Gentleman opposite the Leader of the Opposition (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach), inclosing to me an important Paper, which embodied the views of the Government with respect to the subject of Procedure. The right hon. Gentleman invited me to make those views the subject of a previous and friendly communication with a view to the easier settlement of the matter. it was not possible for me, as I at once wrote to the right hon. Gentleman, in those circumstances, considering the importance of the topics before us and the variety of forms which the announcement of them might take, and which it was my duty to consider beforehand—it was impossible for me to make, or for me to ask one of my Friends among the leading men to make, any proper examination or statement about the important Paper of the right hon. Gentleman, or to meet, at so short a notice, his friendly proposal. When the right hon. Gentleman, in consequence of what he had said, laid his Paper on the Table of the House, as he was quite justified in doing, on the day when the Speech was delivered, we proceeded to examine that Paper immediately after the delivery of the Queen's Speech on the first night of the debate on the Address. We found that the proposal of the Government, in placing a great variety of particulars before us, naturally did notand, indeed, could not-be expected to coincide with our views upon the whole of these particulars. But, nevertheless, we arrived at two conclusions-first, that it would be very desirable to make that plan the basis of further and friendly considerations; secondly, inasmuch as we did not see how private Members, independent Members, of the House could be asked to surrender their means and opportunities of bringing subjects of legislation before the House, we came to the conclusion that it would be well to refer the whole subject to a Select Committee; and that Select Committee we thought ought to be constituted upon a different basis from the ordinary basis, which prescribes a limit of 15 Members. We thought it ought to be a Select Committee of very much more considerable extent, perhaps consisting of as many, or more than twice that number, so as to give free representation of opinion to | when there was so favourable a prospect the various quarters and sections of the of a friendly and effective handling of House. Sir, in point of fact, we were that subject. With regard to coercive desirous not to lose what appeared to us or penal procedure, I certainly still adan excellent opportunity of arriving at a here to the opinion that not a great deal discussion of this rather difficult ques- is to be hoped from further progress in tion, necessarily giving rise to a good that direction. [Sir MICHAEL HICKSdeal of scope for even friendly differences. BEACH: Hear, hear!] I am very glad We were anxious not to lose the oppor- to see that that opinion has the sanction tunity of approaching this question in a of the right hon. Gentleman. But, in friendly spirit, if it were possible to do regard to amicable arrangements for so. If this were the 21st of January, multiplying the means and instruments the question of reference to a Committee at the command of the House, I am might be a more open question than it sanguine enough to believe that we may is at the present moment; because on the perform a very great public service by 21st of January, and with the command putting that mode of procedure into of the time of the House from that date operation. These are the general grounds onwards, there would have been, for any on which we propose to refer the subject Government, a considerable choice with to a Select Committee, and thereby to regard to the taking of Votes in Supply, give effect, so far as circumstances perand a certain portion of Government mit, to the intentions entertained by us, time might have been devoted, not with- and also by a large number of Gentleout advantage, to the consideration of men on the other side of the House. It Procedure. But in the condition in which will be asked of me what course I should the Government found themselves on propose that Her Majesty's Government taking Office last week it was impossible should take in respect to the proceedings to do that; and the alternative was of this Committee? It will be felt and either to postpone the subject of Pro- thought that a Government proposing cedure until, perhaps, the crowding of the appointment of a Select Committee Sessional Business had become greater on a subject of this kind charges itself than at the opening of the Session, or to with a great responsibility. It charges take the course of asking the House to itself with the responsibility of making refer the subject to a Select Committee. known at once and in full to the ComFrom the first of these courses we were mittee the views which it entertains dissuaded by the feeling that, in the first upon the subject, with all the points of place, such a postponement would not the greatest importance. That, Sir, is be agreeable to the sense entertained by the course which we intend to take. The us for a long time past of the importance Committee will not be bound to have of a settlement of this matter, nor would regard to any one Paper or any one piece it have been agreeable to the sense so of evidence in particular; but, no doubt, distinctly manifested by the Government considering the importance of the Paper in Office a month ago with regard to the laid upon the Table by the right hon. importance of an immediate and effec- Gentleman, that Paper must have a tive prosecution of this subject. More- prominent place in whatever attention over, this circumstance offered us a the Committee may give to the subject. favourable opportunity, and enables us The right hon. Gentleman may ask to form a sanguine hope and expecta- whether we propose to submit a Paper tion, that the proceedings of a Commit- of our own, displacing or attempting to tee of this kind would not be very virtual, displace that Paper. We do not propose and would be useful in results. The ques- to do so, and for this plain reasontion of the devolution of Bills, which that with regard to the main proposals was proposed in the plan of the late of that Paper we consider ourselves in Government, and which was fully raised sympathy with them. But the right by them, opens up a channel through hon. Gentleman may make one further which I believe that we shall proceed demand upon us. I have already said with the greatest hope of success in the that there are points in which we think important business of expediting the some addition, some substitution, some performance of the weighty tasks which change should be made. And the right are incumbent upon this House; and hon. Gentleman will ask-"Is it your never before has there been a period intention, when you come into the Mr. W. E. Gladstone Committee, to lay before it the views of the Government upon those points?" In answer to him, I must say, in the most explicit and unequivocal manner, it is our intention to do so. It is really an acknowledgment which we feel to be due to the spirit in which the subject was considered by the late Government that we should not make what would be an unfair and untrue appearance of setting up a rival plan when we do not propose a rival plan. But, on the other hand, it is necessary for the right hon. Gentleman and for those who may represent the framers of the plan to know, and to know at once, what are the points, or what are the principal and particular points, upon which we should be prepared to propose modifications of the plan; but it is, however, quite plain that I should be wasting the time of the House were I to enter at this time upon particulars. Were we engaged now in sharp controversy upon every one of the leading items of the subject of Procedure it might be necessary that I should make a statement with regard to those leading items. It might even be necessary that I should, as it were, make my case upon those leading items in order to justify our proposals; but we have before us the broad fact-in the first place, that much time was spent by the late Parliament upon the subject; in the second place, that it is generally felt that the work, as it was left by the late Parliament, was not complete; and, in the third place, that we have now a great degree of concurrence, not only as to the need of resuming, but as to the mode of resuming, the subject; and I am happy to think that, even since I rose, I find that concurrence to be more positive and extensive than I had thought it to be, because we appear to be, in a great degree, at one in the opinion that it is not by penal and restrictive measures-not by a severe Code of Procedure, but by the judicious use of our means of multiplying our instruments of action-that we should really make the greatest and most effective progress. If there is any point upon which the right hon. Gentleman opposite or any Member of the House desires to be informed as to our views and intentions, I shall be most happy to supply it. We accept the responsibility for the Committee we propose. We shall endeavour to deal with it as a Committee proposed on the responsibility of the Government. We shall make known to the Committee at once the plan that we propose to adopt, though the main portions I believe to be contained in the plan proposed by the late Administration. I believe that, with these particulars before them, the House will be perfectly ready to judge whether this proposal is a right proposal or not. Little advantage will be gained by entering upon the particulars of Procedure in Debate in the House. I am in hopes that it may not be found necessary to spend a great deal of the time of the House in the discussion of the Motion which the House has agreed to entertain. The grounds on which we propose this Committee I believe to be clearly before you, and I conclude by moving the Resolution of which I have given Notice. Motion made, and Question proposed, consider the question of Procedure in the "That a Select Committee be appointed to House of Commons, and to report as to the amendment of existing Rules, and upon any New Rules which they may consider desirable for the efficient despatch of business."-(Mr. W. E. Gladstone.) SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH: Sir, I wish, on my own behalf and that of my Colleagues forming the late Cabinet, to acknowledge the spirit in which the right hon. Gentleman has alluded to our labours in this matter. It is a fair return for the spirit in which we approached the right hon. Gentleman and his Friends when we were in Office; and I would only say that it is a most satisfactory contrast to not a few speeches made by hon. Members now sitting on the Government Bench during the late Election campaign in regard to our conduct on this question. During the whole of the late autumn there was no more favourite subject of accusation against myself and my Colleagues than that we were the friends of Obstruction, and were determined to resist, or at any rate not to support, any alterations of Procedure which would make this House more efficient for its Business. Now, in contradistinction to those accusations, and I may venture to say in complete refutation of them, we have the right hon. Gentleman and his Colleagues frankly taking up our proposals for the amendment of Procedure, and saying that they are so satisfactory that the Government propose, with some small alterations, to | question was as to the sound working condition recommend them to the adoption of a of the great instrument by which all legislation is accomplished." Select Committee of the House. I trust It occurred to us that the first Business to be done by this House, subject, of course, to matters of great urgency, or those which had to be dealt with within a certain time, was to consider this subject of Procedure. Therefore it was I asked the House, on behalf of the late Government, to give the question precedence. Instead of that, the right hon. Gentleman has proposed the appoint I do not rise now for the purpose of objecting to the appointment of a Committee; but I must say I think our proposal was the best, because it insured, I think, a more early decision upon this most important subject. I remember that on February 20, 1882, when last the right hon. Gentleman called the attention of Parliament to the matter, he then alluded to the numerous Committees which the House had appointed to consider the question He told the of its own Procedure. House that that that will be remembered in future, "Those who were so keen for legislation on one subject or another should recollect that, with regard to each and all of them, the primary Sir Michael Hicks-Beach "There have been more Committees of this House upon this subject than upon any other matter. There have been 14 Committees since the Reform Act, or one Committee in every three Sessions and a-half. There have been seven more Committees upon Private Procedure, which is practically part of the subject, making 21 Committees in all, or an average of a new Committee in every two and a-half years."-(3 Hansard, [266] 1134.) And what was the result? Why, in the words of the right hon. Gentleman "These Committees, never leading to adequate results, have now, for many years past, taken effect in what I may, for practical purposes, call total failure." Now we have another Select Committee appointed. It differs, I admit, from previous Committees in this, if I may accurately interpret the statement made by the right hon. Gentleman-that in spite of the wide terms of the Order of Reference which he has moved, it will not be expected or asked to deal with the many and varied sides of this great subject; but that it will have placed before it, on the authority of the Government, a series of Resolutions which will be framed by the Government; that it will be guided by the Government in its deliberations; and that the Government will then be responsible for carrying its proposals into effect. If that be so, I admit, although I do not think much practical good will |