ESSENCE OF PARLIAMENT.
(Extracted from the Diary of Toby, M.P.)
House of Commons, Monday, March 16.—The Winsome Winston, sauntering in from behind Speaker's Chair when Questions had advanced some way, startled by strident cheer from Ministerialists and Irish Nationalists. Opposition angrily replied. First Lord, faintly blushing, found anchorage on Treasury Bench. Unpremeditated outburst of enthusiasm meant as welcome back from Bradford, where he reviewed political situation with force and frankness that recalled his father's platform speeches delivered in his prime. Demonstration repeated when later he rose to answer question concerning his department. Fresh storm of cheering from Ministerialists responded to by defiant shouts from Opposition.
Winston evidently the man of the moment.
Prime Minister, happily refreshed by week-end holiday, finds himself faced by crowd wanting to know all sorts of things that might happen concurrently with, or subsequent to, proposed temporary exclusion of parts of Ulster from operation of Home Rule Bill. There were twenty-six Questions. Assuming minimum number of Supplementaries, there would have been at least one hundred.
To amazement and vexation of earnest seekers after truth, the twenty-six querists discovered that they were being bowled over faster than commonplace nine-pins. As Norman Craig breathlessly complained, the Premier, having answered a question, did not, as is his custom of an afternoon, resume his seat, and thus provide opportunity for supplementary questioner.
This was his method: Taking in hand a sheet of manuscript he recited, "Number 45. This is a hypothetical question. Indeed, it involves no fewer than three hypotheses. Numbers 57, 64 and 72 are in the same category."
Before you knew where you were, bang went four questions. Member after Member rose to protest. The Premier babbled on like the brook.
"The answer to number 46 and to the first part of 70 is in the negative. The answer to number 48 is in the affirmative. Number 49 in the negative. I proceed to number 52."
Members held their breath. What could he say about 52? Evidently he meant to treat it in different fashion.
"Number 52," he continued in the same level voice, as if he were reading catalogue at picture sale, "refers to a small matter which can easily be provided for."
Here was batch of another five questions disposed of in barely more than as many seconds. And to think of all the industry and ingenuity bestowed upon the preparation of this succession of pitfalls designed for the engulfing of a ruthless Minister and the dislocation of an iniquitous Bill!
Situation capped by Premier's refusal to be drawn into minute description of adjustments, financial and administrative, consequent on adoption of his proposed amendment of Home Rule Bill. If general principle were accepted, the rest would follow. If not, why waste time and divert discussion from main issue to subsidiary and incidental details? After beating in vain against the indomitable rock standing at the Table, Bonner Law, on behalf of enraged Opposition, gave notice of vote of censure. What day will be given for discussion? he asked.
"The earliest possible date," replied the imperturbable Premier.
Here episode ended. Its eruption made it clear that hope of settlement on grounds prepared a week ago to-day has vanished.
Business done. Notice from Front Opposition Bench of vote of censure on Ministers.
Tuesday.—Pole-Carew had rather a bad time of it. Attacked in sharp succession by land and sea. Began at Question time. He merely asked whether two divisions and the cavalry brigade in Ireland, which took part in manœuvres last year, weren't rather a scrubby lot of immature boys unfit for public service. To quote exact phrase—"whether the physical appearance of the men was unsatisfactory; and whether the effect of the trooping season was to increase the number of immature boys unfit for active service?"
Seely wrathfully replied in the negative.
"I must," he added, "profess my astonishment that the hon. and gallant gentleman should seek by means of suggestions such as are contained in this question to discourage and belittle the British soldier, to whom he owes so much."
A loud cheer sent home this rebuke.
Worse still when Polly put out to sea and came athwart the First Lord. All he sought was information as to whether the First Sea Lord, having publicly alluded to the danger of relying exclusively on the fleet to protect the country from invasion, "subsequently went back on his word."
"A most insulting and unfair remark," said Winston. "It will," he continued, "do nothing but harm if the Navy think the Chiefs whom they honour and respect are to be subjected to offensive personal attacks of this character directed against them by ex-military men who have gone into politics."
"Only let me have five minutes with him, Mr. Deputy Speaker," said the ex-military man nervously turning up his coat cuffs.
Getting dangerously close to eleven o'clock, at which hour debate, if continued, must automatically close. Winston punctilious in leaving the five minutes demanded. Pole-Carew's retort perhaps scarcely up to occasion.
"I can only say," he remarked, "that the Secretary for War and the First Lord of the Admiralty are worthy to sit on the same bench as the Chancellor of the Exchequer."
Business done.—First Lord explained his Naval policy.
Thursday.—Swift MacNeill introduces new Parliamentary formula. Discussing on Civil Service Vote state of things in Rhodesia as dominated by the Chartered Company he was interrupted by remark from Ormsby-Gore.
Throwing back his head with lofty scorn, and making a few windmill passages with his arms, Member for Donegal said, "I am not going to be interrupted by any gentleman of the House of Cecil."
Had this determination been announced by ordinary Member it would not have possessed importance likely to affect future course of debate. But Swift MacNeill is justly recognised as one of the highest authorities on the science and practice of Parliamentary procedure. If he is able to support his contention, that a Member may of his free will, in exercise of his mature judgment, divide the House into groups of families (as if they were counties of Ulster) and say, "I will not be interrupted by this one or that," whilst it would have useful effect in curtailing proceedings would obviously require nice discrimination.
There are in the present House several family names represented by various Members, not all sitting on same side of House. To take a single example, there are the Wilsons. Like the family of the child with whom Wordsworth conversed, they are seven. If Swift MacNeill's precedent be established, a Member rising to continue debate might, by way of preface, remark, "I am not going to be interrupted by any gentleman of the House of Wilson."
In this particular case A. S. Wilson, whose contributions to debate are exclusively interjectionary, would be cut off from the exercise of a talent that frequently enlivens a sitting.
Swift MacNeill's own case is not free from difficulty. The Speaker is "a gentleman of the House of Cecil." Is he henceforward to be debarred from interrupting the Member for Donegal by calls to order?
Business done.—Bonner Law, master of Parliamentary tactics, obliged Government by moving vote of censure. Challenge hilariously accepted. Great muster of Ministerialists. On division what was meant as vote of censure was practically turned into vote of confidence, carried amid enthusiastic cheering by majority of 93 in House of 597 Members.