it right to press the weapon home. They | garded the fact that the Business of the had, indeed, found a weak place; but he House was still conducted with considerdid not feel able to assist them in press- able regard for the old Forms; that ing the weapon home, and join in a vote there was a desire that opposition should which was to turn out the Government. not be carried beyond certain limits, At the same time, he could not but say which, although not well defined, were he thought it was insane folly on the well understood. But if the New Rules part of the Government to have staked were accepted, everything that was not their existence on a question of mere forbidden by that Code would be admisProcedure, and especially on such a sible. He thought that the Government question as this. He had no doubt they had so far departed from the old custom would win; they would equally have of the House as to inflict on Gentlemen won had he voted against them-but he sitting on the Opposition side the undid not, on the other hand, think he merited humiliation of entirely disrecould vote for a usurpation of power garding not only the loyal attitude they which no Government ought to have. had assumed during the whole time They had placed him, therefore, in the since they had been in Opposition, but very uncomfortable and unusual position of their respect for the unwritten Rules of going out of the House on the division. for the conduct of Parliamentary BusiThe Government would gain the division; ness. With respect to the course of but when they gained it they would have public opinion, it was contended by the nothing to rejoice over, for they would supporters of the Resolution that it was know they had gained it by putting an brought forward and would be adopted unfair restriction upon their followers. in deference to public opinion out-ofThese things did not do much good for doors. He contended that the Opposithe Party. He believed that if the Go- tion for the time being were, or rather vernment got the cloture by these means should be, more directly influenced by it would not do them much good. public opinion than the Government of the day; and for the very natural and obvious reason that the minority of the day was seeking by all means to convert itself into a majority, and he did not see how that could be done except by following and adapting itself to the course of public feeling. He hoped they should hear no more of the suggestion made by the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for India about closing the mouths of individual Members; otherwise it was quite conceivable that should a change of circumstances place the Conservatives on the Treasury Bench a similar Rule might be applied, he would not say to the noble Marquess, but to some Members of his Party. At all events, that was a dangerous doctrine for a Minister of the Crown to give utterance to that private Members were to be silenced, because they annoyed the Government of the day. As regarded the power of the Speaker, he felt perfectly satisfied that there would be nothing to complain of while the present right hon. Gentleman occupied the Chair. But if, say, the noble Lord the Member for Flintshire (Lord Richard Grosvenor), who now held the same Office which the present Speaker formerly held, were elected to the Chair, many Members of the Opposition would [Fourth Night.]

MR. H. S. NORTHCOTE regretted that the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Anderson) had not the manliness to record his vote according to his convictions. He (Mr. Northcote) had no intention of expressing an opinion whether the clôture should be applied to the House or not. But he should like to point out two facts which had struck him as being important. The first was that the Resolution, if carried, would not affect small minorities, and possibly the factious minorities of the House, but rather the regular bulk of the Opposition, against whom no serious charge was brought by the Government. The second was that the Resolution would take away from the Leader of the Opposition the only effectual means of control he possessed over his supporters, which was that, hitherto, from his position in the House, he had been able to hold over them the agis of protection against tyrannical majorities. He would no longer have that power if this Resolution was passed, and the effect of it would be to reduce the Front Opposition Bench to very much the same position as that occupied by individual Members sitting in any portion of the House. Another and an even more serious objection to the adoption of the Resolution in its present form was that it disre

lution was the same as "must." But no | Gentleman the Member for North Devon Speaker or Chairman would so inter- (Sir Stafford Northcote) would openly pret it. Having that responsibility, the across the Table make propositions to Speaker would decline to act unless he the Leader of the House, or that he were satisfied that the question had would employ such opportunities improreally been sufficiently debated, and perly. But unquestionably bargains, would not proceed merely on the "evi- or tacit arrangements of a mischievous dent sense of the House." Another character, would, from time to time, be safeguard lay in the position and duties entered into. He would state frankly of the Leader of the House. Before the that he did not expect too much from Rule could be abused to Party or im- that Rule. The Rule must be considered proper ends, the Leader of the House as a part of their Procedure, and not as would have to combine with the Speaker an isolated Rule. They purposed to take to abuse it. The hon. Member for Berk- away from the Obstructives some of the shire (Mr. Walter) had said that in the weapons with which their hands were discussion of Party questions fair play most familiar, and to prevent the House vanished. He thought, on the contrary, from drifting into aimless discussions that the spirit of fair play was, above all accidentally, which were usually a mere things, eminently characteristic of the waste of time. It was proposed that proceedings of that House. Any Minis- when the House, after much long-suffertry who ventured to misuse such an in- ing, pronounced its censure upon some strument as the first of these Resolutions offending Member, that censure should would soon find its followers deserting be felt. Oppressive Rules were part of it. The immediate result would be that the necessity of the case, though they the Government adopting such a course must not look to such Rules for the dewould find all its own measures blocked. spatch of Business. For the more speedy The Opposition would place Amendment and the better despatch of Business they after Amendment on the Paper, so that must look to two things-one the spirit if the clôture were applied to one debate, of industry in the House, and the other debates would be indefinitely raised on the expansion of the powers of the numerous Amendments, so as to put the House. For his part, he looked to the Government so misusing its power in a two Rules which stood at the end of all worse position than if it had never ap- with the most hope, if the Government plied the Rule. But, it was asked, why would consent to share the work among place the power in the hands of a simple the whole of the House, and not to give majority; why not require a two-thirds it to a section. If Obstruction were to or three-fourths majority? The first be really put down, it must be as much reason against this proposition was that by the general co-operation of the House it was opposed to the invariable rule and as by any Rule. There was some danger practice of Parliament in all other mat- of a feeling springing up of a friendly ters. There was danger in departing neutrality to Obstruction; there was some from a long-established and Constitu- danger of hon. Members thinking that tional usage. His second reason was if they did not openly connive at Obthat in such a case the minority might struction, and did not openly engage in find itself hopelessly crushed. He had it, they could remain in a merely passive much greater dislike to the suppression state. In his opinion, no neutrality was of small minorities than to the silencing possible in this matter. No one really of a powerful and numerous minority. anxious for the economy of public time It might very conceivably be the wish of could be neutral with regard to the 19-20ths of the House that the debate waste of it. They might fairly say in should close when the question had by this case that those who were not with no means been sufficiently discussed. them in the saving of public time were His third reason was that such an ar- against them. What remedies were prorangement would really put the power posed by the other side? The right hon. in the hands of the Opposition. It would Baronet the Member for East Gloucesterbe for the Opposition to allow or refuse shire (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach), in a the clôture, and the inevitable result very temperate speech, had admitted that would be a system of bargaining be- some power must be found for closing tween the Opposition and the Ministry. debates which were unduly prolonged; He did not mean that the right hon. and the remedy he suggested was con[Fourth Night.]

SIR R. ASSHETON CROSS said, that his argument was that the adoption of the Rule for adjournment would have entirely put an end to unduly protracted Sittings.

MR. WHITBREAD said, that it was perfectly possible for 20 hon. Members to be engaged in Obstruction, and to keep the House sitting for 24 hours by repeating the same arguments, without being guilty of any transgression of the Rules.

SIR R. ASSHETON CROSS observed, that he had also contended that that would be met by the other Rule, by which repetition was not to be allowed.

tained in the Rules which followed this. | Member for South-West Lancashire any No doubt there were, to some extent, proposal on this point. remedies against Obstruction; but they were mainly remedies against the offender. The speech of the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for India had been somewhat misinterpreted. The hon. Member for Exeter (Mr. Northcote) imagined that the noble Marquess had advocated closing the mouths of hon. Members for the purpose of putting an end to a debate. That was what the noble Marquess expressed himself as anxious to avoid. He said he thought it better for them to put an end to a long debate by the adoption of this Rule rather than by closing the lips of hon. Members. It should be remembered that Obstruction had a tendency to spread. It was perfectly possible for 20 or 30 hon. Members to prolong a debate unduly without personally offending against the Rules of the House. If 20 or 30 hon. Members agreed to prolong the debate simply by repeating the same idea, so long as the speeches were in accordance with the Rules of the House it would be impossible for them individually to be stopped by the Chair. There had been no attempt on the other side to grapple with the real difficulty. Much had been said as to the suspension of liberty of debate; but no real attempt had been made to meet the difficulty of an unduly prolonged debate. He would remind the House of what took place last year, when, after an excessively long discussion, the Speaker interposed on his own authority, and took the very grave responsibility of closing the debate. Then the Speaker appealed to the House for directions, and that appeal was now responded to on the other side by the refusal to give him directions for his guidance in the future. Hon. Members on the other side simply asked the House to shrink from taking upon itself the responsibility, and to leave it upon its officers. He would ask whether it was a generous way of dealing with the appeal of the Chair? Had hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite reflected upon the advice they were giving the House when they proposed to leave the Speaker and the Chairman of Ways and Means in the same position in which they were placed last year when they appealed to the House for Rules for their guidance? He did not find in the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the

MR. WHITBREAD said, that that was idle repetition. That Rule would not meet the case, because it could not be said that it was repetition for one hon. Member to use the same argument as had been used by another hon. Member. Was the course recommended by hon. Gentlemen opposite a proper answer to the appeal by the Chair for directions for future guidance? All that was proposed was, practically, to leave the Speaker in the same position as before, and to permit him again to take the responsibility of acting when the occasion should arise. It was with the utmost pain that he had come to the conclusion that their Rules were no longer sufficient to meet the case; but it was the sincerity of their convictions on that side of the House as to the necessity for change which induced them to support this proposal. He had clung almost desperately to the hope that they might be able to get on without change; but the events of the last two or three years had driven him slowly and reluctantly to the conclusion that the time had come when an alteration was absolutely necessary. After the 41 hours' Sitting, he was convinced of the necessity of some such change as was now proposed. The Rules under which the House was governed were good, no doubt, but were not perfect. They were the outcome of the experience and the wisdom of those who preceded them in that House; and, in his opinion, they should be sorry successors of those men if, in their day, when the necessity for change had been proved, they set up those Rules as idols to be blindly worshipped, and refused to change them. He should support

these Resolutions in the hope that more, | duced to reply. If ever there was a deperhaps, by their insertion amongst the bate of great and varied interest, in Standing Orders than by their frequent which there was no Obstruction, it was application, they might gradually bring the debate on the Land Bill; and for back to the House some measure of that the Party to which he belonged he said self-restraint which, if it had not lost, it though he supposed they were conwas in danger of losing; in the hope sidered responsible for every delay of that they might give them some of their Business-that they kept silent during old aptitude for the discharge of Busi- that debate except when it was absoness; and in the hope that they might lutely necessary to speak. They purenable them once again to take a firm posely left the speaking to two or grasp of the affairs of this great nation. three Members who fully understood the MR. JUSTIN M'CARTHY remarked, measure; while he and many others took that the hon. Member for Bedford, who little or no part in the debate. How had just addressed the House, was al- could the clôture, suppose it then existed, ways regarded as an authority on such have assisted that Bill or the House of a subject; and he (Mr. M'Carthy), in Commons? On that point the hon. common with many others, listened to Gentleman who last spoke failed to his speech with attention and respect. give them any information whatever. But that speech lost much of its value The right hon. Gentleman the Presias a contribution to the present debate, dent of the Local Government Board inasmuch as it was given up wholly to addressed himself almost altogether the consideration of the general neces- to the task of re-assuring hon. Memsity for some change in the Rules of bers on the Conservative side of the Procedure, or in the system of conducting House against the dread that they might the Business of the House. The hon. be suppressed or put down by this clôture Member did not apply himself to prove Resolution. The right hon. Gentleman a necessity for this Rule of cloture. The was considering the case of a minority aphon. Member had said that on the Op- proaching near in numerical strength to position side of the House Members had the Government majority; and, while he no adequate idea of the difficulty of evidently considered he was bound to regetting through the Business, while they assure that strong minority, he did not had a very extravagant notion of the seem to care how sharply or how suddanger of this Rule of clôture. He denly the ruling power might deal with a (Mr. M'Carthy) replied that he had an small minority. That small uninfluential adequate idea of the difficulty of getting minority, he (Mr. M'Carthy) thought, was through their Business. He would even the Party which it was the business of the go further, and admit that it was impos- great and powerful Party to protect. sible adequately to discharge the Busi- The men who came into Office when the ness which that House ought to do present occupants went out, the Party under the present system of arrange- which carried on a regular oscillation ment. If the time were fitting, he could from Opposition to Ministerial Benches, state his idea of the proper and the needed no protection, for under no only means by which the House might circumstances could they be effectually relieve itself of its present great burden. silenced; but a small and weak minoWhat he did not hear from the hon.rity, consisting of men who were withMember for Bedford was any suggestion as to how this Rule of clôture would enable the House to get through the Business better. He gave an illustration in support of his arguments which certainly seemed unlucky. He spoke of the Irish Land Bill of last Session, and remarked that many Members who might have made important contributions to the debates upon it, and might even have re-moulded much of the Bill, could not speak, because they knew that if they did someone else must be prevented from speaking, or possibly be in

out influence or power in the House, and which could be crushed by a bare majority as well as by a union of the strength of both Parties, did not seem to be at all considered by the right hon. Gentleman. The hon. Member for Bedford had complained that no hon. Members from that side of the House had offered any suggestion for an improvement in the conduct of debate. It did not seem that much encouragement was extended to them for such a purpose by the speech of the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Home Secretary. The [Fourth Night.]