The Sun.
London, England, 1862-02-12 00:00:00

would venture to say that the tlvo great Votes et the esti-
mates, viz., the number of men and the money required for
them, would be taken at Otte, and the only questi e a left for
discussion would be those details. If that were se, where
would they be P They would have parted, in the early part
of the session, with that control which they ought to have
over the public expenditure, because, by their first votes,
r they would give up the main substance upon which all their
other votes hung. (Hear.) The hon, members for Lambeth
and Brighton thought they would get greater control over
the expenditure by the altered form of proceeding which
they attempted to introduce. But how were they to do that?
They would go into committee at 5 o'clock, When was the
dull time in the house ? From 7 o'clock to 10. Hon. mem •
bers might no doubt argue particular votes, but they could
not travel one inch beyond them, and none of the collateral
questions connected with them could be discussed. If the
hon. members for Lambeth and Brighton were really deaf-
rims of controlling and checking expenditure, he was confi-
dent they would do it better by adhering to the old rule of
the house rather than by giving up that usage, which ena-
bled them to exercise a control which the House of Com-
mons should never abandon. But was there nothing else
which they ought to consider ? For many years they had
been trying to improve the course of procedure in the house,
and they had succeeded in improving it. Many 'suggestions
were made by different speakers, and by the Speaker as
much as any, because he presided over the committee which
sat in 1848, and made recommendations considered with the
greatest care and prudence. The two last committees which
sat upon the forms and procedure of the house in regard to
public business had this particular question referred to
them, and both had refused to recommend such a change as
that proposed. Those committees were composed of most in-
fluential members of the house, and their opinions were
confirmed by the house when the question was brought be•
fore it P But had committees done nothing to diminish the
opportunities which unofficial and independent members
had for bringing forward questions when and how they
pleased P They had shut up almost all the avenues to inde-
pendent members, and they would shut up nearly everyone
if they gave up this power. (Hear, hear.) On the order of
the day for committee of supply they might challenge the
minister upon any subject they wished. Those members
unconnected with office had two days on which they could
bring forward notices of motion ; one of those days had
been taken from them. He did not complain of that. He
believed it was even right to do so; but they must bear in
mind their opportunities for independent action were taken
away from them one after another, and now it was sought
to take away that opportunity which the House of Com-
mons possessed for exercising one of its fundamental powers
—namely, not to grant a shilling of money until the people
of the country had had an opportunity of laying their griev-
ances and complaints before the house. He did not wish
to travel any further in that direction, because he thought
the hon, gentleman would hardly, after the intimation of
the Secretary of State for the Home Department, persevere
with his motion as it now stood, and if that were so, it was
desirable to see the form of the right hon. baronet's pro-
posal before they were asked to express an opinion upon it.
(Hear, hear.) He could not part with the subject without
requesting hon. gentlemen to read the report made by the
committee of last year—a report drawn up by a man whose
grave authority,whose wise administration, whose thorough
knowledge of the business of the house and of the constitu-
tional principles upon which they were to act, rendered his
judgment and opinion of the utmost value. The voice of that
man was no longer in that house, but his report was there,
and he knew, from conversations with him, that if there
was one point more than another on which he was anxious,
it was that they should not part without the greatest deli-
beration with any of those powers and authorities which
the house as an independent body ought to exercise. Sir
James Graham was unfortunately taken from among them.
(Hear, hear.) The gap which he had made in the house
was a gap not easily supplied. (Hear, hear.) He felt that
the whole house subscribed to that opinion, and he would
say no more upon the subject. He would only once more
entreat them to bear in mind that almost the last words Sir
J, Graham addressed to the house were those contained in
that valuable report, in every part of which he (Mr.
Walpole) most heartily concurred, and to the conclusions of
which he was only endeavouring to give a most feeble, but
warm and earnest support. (Cheers.)
Sir G. C. LEWIS said the right hon. gentleman had put
the question on a fair issue when he said that the point
they had to decide was whether the adoption of the rule
now proposed would or would not facilitate the ample and
free discussion of the estimates. Upon that issue he was
perfectly willing that the question should be tried. In his
opinion the adoption of that rule would facilitate the dis-
cussion of the estimates. Some gentlemen had expressed
a wish that their orders should be altered in the manner
pointed out, and he concurred with them in that opinion.
He would shortly state his 'reasons. It must be remem-
bered that, when the House of Commons made orders for
the conduct of public business, those orders should not be
evaded. By the present rules, one night (Tuesday) was
entirely devoted to the notices of motions of unofficial
members. One day of the week (Wednesday) was devoted
entirely to the orders of unofficial members. There was
another night (Friday) which was practically devoted to
n ()ties., of linnffloial man)hara. T}..4 right hou.ourublo sett-
tleman took an inaccurate -view of the change made last
session when he said that Friday was taken away from in-
dependent members. The change from Thursday to Friday
was only nominal. . Instead of speeches being made on the
question of adjournment from Friday till Monday, they
were now made on the motion for going into supply, the
order of supply being invariably placed first on that day.
Therefore, he contended that, practically, two notice nights
and one order day were exclusively at the disposal of non-
official members, namely, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Fri-
day. It was a rule of the house that government orders
should have precedence on Thursdays and Mondays,
and he presumed that it must be the intention of the
house that, practically speaking, the government orders
should come on first on those days. But it was
well known that before Easter the irst order was generally
supply, and the rule which enabled hon. members to antici-
pate that motion practically converted those two nights
into notice nights. That was the practical effect produced
in the business of the house before Easter, and the conse-
quence was that the discussion on the estimate was greatly
delayed and impeded, and the legislative business thrown to
the end of the session. (Hear, hear.) Now the proposal
submitted to the house, he confessed, seemed a reasonable
one. It was important that members should not be left in
a state ;of uncertainty on Thursday. The abject of the
motion, as he understood it, was that members should not
be in a state of uncertainty, but that when they came down
and the committee of supply was called, they should know
it would occupy all night, whereas if they saw a string of
notices relating to a number of miscellaneous subjects, it
was uncertain how long they would occupy. Perhaps they
came and found that supply had come on in their absence,
and that they had lost their opportunity, and great incon-
venience was the result. What was proposed was that
on Thursday nights supply should come on first, which
did not seem an unreasonable proposition to make, and
he thought it would not be attended with these dan-
gerous consequences which his right hon. friend
spoke of, because there would be an opportunity on
other supply nights, or on Tuesdays, to make motions. If
he house would look to this matter in a dispassionate man-
ner they would see that this alteration would tend, not to
the inconvenience of members of the Government, because
they had to attend every night, and it was to them a matter
of indifference what time the orders came on, but it was a
serious matter for unofficial members to know for a certainty
when supply v. Quid come on.
Mr. DISRAELI—I do not clearly understand the right
hon. gentleman whether he supports or opposes the motion
of the hon. member. In case he is supporting the motion
it is inconvenient, on this occasion, to be discussing another
motion which is not before us. I will first dispose of the
motion of the hon, member for Brighton, and that motion
I have no hesitation, as far as I am concerned, in opposing.
The motion is, that immediately after the estimates are
brought in a day should be fixed in each week when griev-
ances may not be discussed before supply is granted. Now,
great inconvenience might arise from a resolution of that
kind. It may be that the Government might be inconve-
nienced by such a course. They might not want supply.
Suppose they brought forward a great measure, and wanted
to proceed with that measure continuously, it might inter-
fere to have a committee of supply regularly on one night
every week. Supposing a great measure were before thehouse
committees might be sitting in celebrated localities without
the walls of the Houses of Parliament, and could the hon.
gentleman the member for Brighton, in the midst of his
enthusiasm, wish that the house should, under such circum-
stances, formally go on a certain night every week into
committee of supply ? lam sure that the hon. gentleman
is of too ardent a temperament to submit to such control, and
therefore he will see that managing affairs in Parliament is
not so methodical a matter after all when Sou have to deal
with the passions and prejudices of a large body of men. I
take it for granted that the house will never agree to this--
that immediately after the estimated are laid en the table
we should proceed compulsorily to vote supplies. That is
the proposition we are called to decide upon to-night, and
therefore I anticipate that the motion of the hen, gentleman
will be negatived. It would have been much better if the
discussion had closed with that result, but after the obser-
vations from the Treasury bench we cannot let the matter
rest there, because we have a counter proposition—l will
not say proposed, but recommended by the Government--
that there should be one day every week set apart, if neces-
sary—not a compulsory, but an optional arrangement—for
voting supplies. There appear to me the gravest objections
in fixing one day in the week, even if optional, for voting
supplies, without previous consideration of grievances. I
have
nuvuvve
dhneieretshtahaterade that
t
heard aany answer from the right hon, gentleman
to the observations of the hon. member for Inverness. Do
I to prevent motions coming
irrelevanttotesndupepdly ?
larSir G.
°REY—Those which do not refer to the particu-
vote
Mr. D
ISItAILIYes but they may refer to the parti-
cular subject tow hich the • the house will submit votes refer. Ido not think that
wto a resolution of that kind, but the
question is, what do
tions in rules regulatineggthaien by
these considerable revolu-
only argument in favour of ditis.cussions of the house. The
s iltsththeat certain members who
are interested in certainvo
tareto enjoy the oppor-
tunity of discussing those votes raueY submit
.to the. unheard
of and unjustifiable inconvenience of being in their places.