Hansard's Parliamentary Debates

which enabled Lord Beaconsfield to attain to the highest position in the State. We admire his tact and his urbanity as the Leader of a great Party; and we fully understand and even share in the regret which must be felt by his friends at the loss of one so distinguished amongst the distinguished. The Prime Minister has expressed a hope that this occasion will not be converted into one of political hostility. I hope the same. I can assure hon. Gentlemen opposite that I should be sorry to use one word which may offend the feelings of anyone in the House. But, when we are asked to vote a national memorial to the late Earl of Beaconsfield, we are obliged to pause, and not to allow ourselves to be carried away by impulsive sentiment, but to consider whether the monument is merited, not only by the personal qualities of the man, but by the qualities of the Minister. The Prime Minister has called our attention to precedents. I was much surprised to hear the right hon. Gentleman say he had acted according to precedent in bringing forward this Motion, for I myself have been unable to find any precedents at all analogous to the course we are asked to take to-day. During the last 125 years there have been a vast number of Prime Ministers. Of these, only five have received this sort of recognition from the country. The first was the Earl of Chatham, and the monument was specifically stated to be erected on account of great and signal services. The words inscribed on the memorial in Westminster Abbey are

hon. Gentlemen opposite will, I think, agree, were not wanting in feelings of generosity to a political opponent. There were two grounds on which their opposition was based. They said that Mr. Pitt's policy had not been successful, and held that success was an essential element for every national reward; and, also, that the policy advocated by Mr. Pitt was not in accordance with the true interests of the nation. On that occasion, Mr. Fox declared that he could not, from a sense of public duty, be a party to the conferring of public honours upon a man who was the soul-certainly the chief supporter-of a system which he had always been taught to consider a bad one. The next instance is that of Mr. Percival; but the circumstances connected with the death of that Gentleman were of so peculiar a character that it is not necessary for me to do more than mention the case. Then comes Sir Robert Peel, whose case the Prime Minister specially selected as a precedent for the Motion. Sir Robert Peel had been the Leader of a great and important Party; but his financial views were not identical with those of many of his followers. When, therefore, a Motion like the present was proposed, those who had been his followers were naturally ready to vote for it; while those who had been opposed to him on his general policy were still prepared to acknowledge that in proposing the abolition of the Corn Laws he had done the country immense service. His monument recorded merely the date of his birth and his death, stating nothing which could be a subject of controversy. The next statesman was Lord Palmerston, who also died as Prime Minister. Shortly before his death a General Election took place, at which the country entirely concurred in his policy; and considering that circumstance, and considering also that he had a majority in the House, it was not surprising that the House should have unanimously concurred in the erection of a memorial to him. There have been other Prime Ministers to whom such honours have not been paid. I might name a great many; but I will only mention threeMr. Canning, Lord Derby, and Earl Russell. Mr. Canning had a monument to his memory in Westminster Abbey; but it was not a public one-it was raised by the pious and respectful sub

"During his administration Divine Providence exalted Great Britain to a height of prosperity and glory unknown to any former age." Though there were many Members of the House at that time who acted in opposition to the Earl of Chatham, there was not one who did not agree that he had performed great and signal services. It was in consequence of this, and not that they absolutely concurred in everything that the noble Earl had done, that the Vote was unanimously agreed to by the House. The next Prime Minister to whom the honour was granted was Mr. Pitt. He died as Prime Minister of England. A proposal was brought forward of much the same character as the present one, and it was most strenuously opposed by Mr. Fox and Mr. Windham, statesmen who,

The

scriptions of his friends and adherents. | who played so great a part in contemLord Derby, the Chief of the very porary history as Lord Beaconsfield to Party now sitting on the Opposition suspend our judgment at will, and look Benches, received on his death no on him simply as an amiable man of national honours. Still later, the death great genius, and not as a Minister. of a statesman who had been the The monument we are asked to raise is Leader of the Liberal Party for many a political one, and it is as a politician years occurred-I refer to Earl Russell. that Lord Beaconsfield's claims to it have That noble Earl, it is true, has a monu- to be judged. The deceased Minister's ment within these walls; but this, like policy was a bold and clear policy, and I Canning's, was subscribed for by his can well understand two different estifriends. I think, therefore, that if we mates being formed of it. I can pergo to precedents we should find no pre- fectly well conceive that hon. Gentlemen cedent which shows that a public monu- [ opposite view it with admiration, and ment has been voted to one who had most conscientiously believe that Lord been once Prime Minister, unless he had Beaconsfield was entitled to the gratiat the time of his death a majority in tude of the nation for advocating such the House of his own supporters, or a a policy. But I think also that my own majority of those who considered that and my hon. Friends' convictions should he had performed great and signal pub-not be questioned. I wish to avoid all lic services. In the present case, the grounds for the monument are set forth in the Resolution itself. I think everyone will be prepared to concur in the Resolution so far as the correctness of the grounds are concerned; but where I and my hon. Friends part company with those who support the Resolution is in our belief that these grounds are not sufficient to justify a national monument. It is true that Lord Beaconsfield had "devotedly laboured in Parliament and in great Offices of State; " but so have many others, past and present, who have had no national memorial. I admit that Lord Beaconsfield possessed "rare and splendid gifts;" but rare and splendid gifts in themselves are a danger rather than an advantage to the State when the possessor of them does not use them for what is considered by the majority of his fellow-countrymen to be to the public advantage. The mere possession of great intellectual gifts is an advantage to the person possessing them; but we are obliged to look, not only to this, but to how they are employed, and also to the results of their employment. A statue is granted by a national Vote to a politician because his country is grateful to him; but, with all respect to hon. Gentlemen opposite, whose feelings I certainly do not wish to hurt, I do not consider that the country has reason to be grateful for anything that Lord Beaconsfield did. It is impossible, to my mind, to separate the man from the Minister-the statesman from the statesmanship. Especially is it impossible in the case of one

Mr. Labouchere

controversy on this occasion with respect
to Lord Beaconsfield's policy, and on
that subject we and hon. Gentlemen
opposite may agree to disagree.
only tribunal that can ultimately and
finally decide between us will be the tri-
bunal of posterity. But it cannot be for-
gotten that little more than a year ago
an appeal was made to the only exist-
ing tribunal, and that tribunal has em-
phatically decided against the policy of
Lord Beaconsfield. During Lord Bea-
consfield's tenure of Office, hon. Gentle-
men on this side of the House had pro-
tested against his policy, not merely on
the ground that it was unwise and im-
politic, but on the ground that it was
politically dishonest. Without carrying
political hostility beyond the grave, it
is surely not unreasonable of Liberals
to maintain the same opinions to-day
as they did yesterday. If we now were
to express our approval of a policy which
at the General Election we denounced,
we should, in my opinion, be stultifying
ourselves. We should be laying our-
selves open to the charge either that
we had indulged at the General Election
in rhetorical exaggeration for the pur-
pose of misleading public opinion, or
that we are absolutely indifferent to the
morality or immorality of a policy. I
appeal to hon. Gentlemen on both sides
of the House whether we ought to make
ourselves obnoxious to either of these
alternatives. I do not deny Lord Bea-
consfield's claims to a voluntary monu-
ment, and I acquit hon. Gentlemen op-
posite, of course, of being influenced in
the matter by considerations of money.

The question is, whether the policy of were to honour him. It certainly was Lord Beaconsfield should obtain, now not as a politician, for his policy was dethat he is dead, that public recogni- nounced as insane. It could not be as tion of soundness and moralty which a literary man, for he was better known the country denied to it while he was as a plagiarist of other men's speeches After alive? If, at the General Election, he than for his own productions. had been returned with a triumphant the death of another Prime Minister, majority, nothing would have been more Lord Beaconsfield had stooped to plareasonable than the present proposal; giarism in the eulogium which he probut the reverse being the case, it is nounced upon him, having previously impossible for those who denounced his said of him that he had failed as a policy when alive, to concur unanimously Prime Minister because he did not unin a national apotheosis of it so soon as derstand England. For his own part, he is dead. I had put a Notice on the he knew of nothing which Lord BeaPaper to the effect that it was my inten-consfield had done to justify such a Motion to move the Previous Question; but as that would not have been, I believe, convenient to the course of the discussion-for it would have involved its consideration before the Prime Minister had spoken to the Resolution-I substitute for it a Motion which is tantamount to it, and that is that the Chairman leave the Chair. The division on that Motion will, I think, show that the proposal made by the Prime Minister has not the general assent of the House, and that being so, I would, after what has fallen from the right hon. Baronet the Member for North Devonshire, submit to hon. Gentlemen opposite that they will do well to go into the Lobby in support of my Motion. At any rate, I hope that hon. Members will do so who sit upon the Liberal Benches, and who have over and over again protested against the policy of Lord Beaconsfield both in this House and in the country. The hon. Gentleman concluded by moving that the Chairman leave the Chair.

MR. CAINE seconded the Amendment.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do now leave the Chair."-(Mr. Labouchere.)

MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR said, he thought that it was a thousand pities that the question had ever been brought before the House. The mischief which Lord Beaconsfield had done survived him, and he could not understand how the Prime Minister, who knew so much of the effects of that Nobleman's policy, could ask a House composed of Irishmen as well as Scotchmen and Englishmen to vote for the erection of a monument to that noble Lord's memory at the public expense. He was quite at a loss to imagine in what capacity they

tion as the present. With regard to Irish grievances, the noble Lord described the requirements of Ireland in graphic language many years ago; but when he was placed in the position of Prime Minister he never did anything to redress its grievances, and yet Irishmen were asked to vote public money for a monument to a man of that description, whose life was spent in antagonism to the interests of their country, and who had vilified all her public men. In his will he had left behind him a monument of his selfishness, for it showed that in death, as in life, his leading thought was a glorification of Benjamin Disraeli, and nothing else. Entertaining those views, he should cordially support the Amendment.

Question put.

The Committee divided :-Ayes 54; Noes 380: Majority 326.

AYES.

Ferguson, R.

Ffolkes, Sir W. H. B.
Filmer, Sir E.
Finch, G. H.
Findlater, W.

Fitzmaurice, Lord E.

Fitzpatrick, hn.B.E.B. Fitzwilliam, hn. H. W. Fitzwilliam, hn. W. J.

Holms, J.

Home, Lt. Col. D. M.
Hope, rt. hn. A. J. B. B.
Howard, E. S.

Howard, G. J.
Howard, J.

Hubbard, rt. hon. J.
Inderwick, F. A.

Jackson, W. L.

Childers, rt. hn. H. C. E. Fletcher, Sir H.

James, Sir H.

Flower, C.

James, W. H.

Floyer, J.

Jardine, R.

Foljambe, C. G. S.

Jenkins, D. J.

Foljambe, F. J. S.

Johnson, W. M.

Close, M. C.

Forester, C. T. W.

Johnstone, Sir F.
Joicey, Colonel J.

Balfour, A. J.

Cobbold, T. C.

Forster, rt. hon. W. E.

Kennard, Col. E. H.

Balfour, J. B.

Coddington, W.

Foster, W. H.

Baring, Viscount

Cohen, A.

Fowler, H. H.

Kennaway, Sir J. H.

Kingscote, Col. R. N. F.

Barnes, A.

Colebrooke, Sir T. E.

Fowler, R. N.

Kinnear, J.

Barttelot, Sir W. B.

Collins, E.

Fremantle, hon. T. F.

Knightley, Sir R.

Bass, H.

Colman, J. J.

Fry, L.

Laing, S.

Bass, M.

Bateson, Sir T.

Beach, rt. hn. Sir M. H.
Beach, W. W. B.
Bellingham, A. H.

Bentinck, rt. hn. G. C.
Biddell, W.
Birkbeck, E.

Blackburne, Col. J. I.
Blake, J. A.
Blennerhassett, Sir R.
Boord, T. W.

Bourke, right hon. R.
Brand, H. R.
Brassey, H. A.

Brassey, T.

Brett, R. B.

Brinton, J.

Brise, Colonel R.
Broadley, W. H. H.
Brodrick, hon. W. St.
J. F.
Brooks, M.
Brown, A. H.
Bruce, Sir H. H.
Bruce, hon. R. P.
Bruce, hon. T.

Brymer, W. E.

Burghley, Lord

Burrell, Sir W. W.

Buszard, M. C.
Buxton, F. W.
Buxton, Sir R. J.

Cameron, D.
Campbell, J. A.
Campbell, Sir G.
Campbell, R. F. F.

Campbell- Bannerman,

Carden, Sir R. W.
Carington, hn. Colonel
W. H. P.
Cartwright, W. C.
Castlereagh, Viscount
Causton, R. K.
Cavendish, Lord E.
Cavendish, Lord F. C.
Cecil, Lord E. H. B. G.
Chambers, Sir T.
Chaplin, H.
Cheetham, J. F.

Colthurst, Col. D. la T. Gabbett, D. F.

Cotes, C. C.

Courtauld, G.
Cowan, J.

Cowen, J.

Cowper, hon. H. F.
Craig, W. Y.
Creyke, R.

Crichton, Viscount
Cropper, J.

Cross, rt. hon. Sir R. A.
Cubitt, rt. hon. G.

Cunliffe, Sir R. A.

Dalrymple, C.

Davenport, W. B.
Davies, R.

De Worms, Baron H.
Dickson, Major A. G.
Dickson, J.
Digby, Col. hon. E.
Dixon-Hartland, F. D.
Dodson, rt. hon. J. G.
Donaldson-Hudson, C.
Douglas, A. Akers-
Duckham, T.

Gardner, R. Richard

son

Garnier, J. C.

Gibson, rt. hon. E.
Giffard, Sir H. S.

Gladstone, rt. hn. W.E.
Gladstone, H. J.
Gladstone, W. H.

Glyn, hon. S. C.

Goldney, Sir G.

Gooch, Sir D.

Gorst, J. E.
Grant, D.

Grant, Sir G. M.
Grantham, W.
Greene, E.
Greer, T.

Gregory, G. B.
Grey, A. H. G.
Guest, M. J.
Gurdon, R. T.
Hamilton, Lord C. J.
Hamilton, I. T.
Hamilton, right hon.
Lord G.
Hamilton, J. G. C.

Duff, rt. hon. M. E. G. Harcourt, E. W.

Harcourt, rt. hon. Sir
W. G. V. V.

Duff, R. W.

Dyke, rt. hn. Sir W. H.

Eaton, H. W.

Edwards, H.

Hartington, Marq. of Harvey, Sir R. B.

Egerton, Adm. hon. F. Hastings, G. W.

Emlyn, Viscount Ennis, Sir J. Errington, G. Estcourt, G. S. Evans, T. W.

Ewart, W.

Ewing, A. O.
Fairbairn, Sir A.
Farquharson, Dr. R.
Fay, C. J.
Feilden, Major-General

R. J.
Fellowes, W. H.
Fenwick-Bisset, M.

Hay, rt. hon. Admiral

Sir J. C. D.
Hayter, Sir A. D.
Helmsley, Viscount
Henry, M.
Herbert, hon. S.
Herschell, Sir F.
Hibbert, J. T.
Hicks, E.

Hildyard, T. B. T.
Hill, Lord A. W.
Hill, A. S.
Hill, T. R.
Hinchingbrook, Visc.
Holker, Sir J.
Holland, Sir H. T.
Hollond, J. R.

Leigh, hon. G. H. C.
Leighton, Sir B.
Leighton, S.

Lennox, Lord H. G.

Lever, J. O.

Levett, T. J.

Lewis, C. E.

Lewisham, Viscount

Lindsay, Col. R. L.
Litton, E. F.
Lloyd, M.
Long, W. H.
Lopes, Sir M.
Lowther, hon. W.
Lusk, Sir A.

Lymington, Viscount
Lyons, R. D.
Macartney, J. W. E.
Mac Iver, D.
Mackintosh, C. F.
Macnaghten, E.
M'Clure, Sir T.
M'Garel-Hogg, Sir J.
M'Kenna, Sir J. N.
M'Lagan, P.
M.Laren, J.

Makins, Colonel W. T.
Manners, rt. hn. Lord J.
March, Earl of

Marjoribanks, Sir D. C.
Marjoribanks, E.
Marriott, W. T.
Massey, rt. hon. W. N.
Master, T. W. C.
Maxwell, Sir H. E.
Milbank, F. A.
Miles, Sir P. J. W.
Mills, Sir C. H.

Mowbray,rt.hn.SirJ.R. Seely, C. (Nottingham)
Mulholland, J.
Selwin - Ibbetson, Sir
Mundella, rt. hon. A. J.
Murray, C. J.
Newdegate, C. N.
Newport, Viscount
Nicholson, W.
Nicholson, W. N.
Noel, E.

Noel, rt. hon. G. J. Nolan, Major J. P. North, Colonel J. S. Northcote, H. S. Northcote, rt. hn. Sir

S. H.

H. J. Severne, J. E. Sheridan, H. B. Smith, A. Smith, rt. hon. W. H. Smyth, P. J. Spencer, hon. C. R. Stanhope, hon. E. Stanley, rt. hn. Col. F. Stewart, J. Storer, G. Story-Maskelyne, M.H. Stuart, H. V. Sykes, C. Talbot, J. G. Tavistock, Marquess of Taylor, rt. hn. Col. T.E. Tennant, C. Thomson, H. Thornhill, T. Thynne, Lord H. F. Tollemache, H. J. Tollemache, hon. W. F. Torrens, W. T. M'C. Tyler, Sir H. W. Villiers, rt. hon. C. P. Vivian, A. P. Wallace, Sir R. Walpole, rt. hon. S. Walrond, Col. W. H. Walter, J. Warburton, P. E. Warton, C. N.

Watney, J.

Waugh, E.

Whitley, E.

Wiggin, H.
Wills, W. H.

Willyams, E. W. B.
Wilmot, Sir H.
Wilmot, Sir J. E.
Wilson, I.
Wilson, Sir M.
Winn, R.

Wodehouse, E. R.
Wolff, Sir H. D.
Woolf, S.
Wortley, C. B. Stuart-
Wroughton, P.

Rothschild, Sir N. M. de Wyndham, hon. P.

Roundell, C. S.

Russell, Lord A.

St. Aubyn, W. M.
Sandon, Viscount
Schreiber, C.
Sclater-Booth, rt.hn.G.

Yorke, J. R.

TELLERS.

Grosvenor, Lord R. Kensington, Lord

SIR ALEXANDER GORDON explained that he had accidentally gone into the wrong Lobby. Seeing the hon. Member for Mid Kent (Sir William Hart-Dyke) standing at the door of one of the Division Lobbies, he thought he was right in going into it.

THE CHAIRMAN said, the explanation would be noted in the Minutes.

Resolved, That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that Her Majesty will give directions that a Monument be erected in the Collegiate Church of Saint Peter, Westminster, to the Memory of the late Right Hon. the Earl of Beaconsfield, with an Inscription expressive of the high sense entertained by the House of his rare and splendid gifts, and of his devoted labours in Parliament and in great Offices of State; and to assure Her Majesty that this House will make good the expenses attending the same.

Resolution to be reported To-morrow.

LAND LAW (IRELAND) BILL.-[BILL 135.] (Mr. Gladstone, Mr. Forster, Mr. Bright, Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, Mr. Solicitor General for Ireland.)

Order read, for resuming Adjourned Debate on Amendment proposed to Question [25th April], "That the Bill be now read a second time."

And which Amendment was,

To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "this House, while willing to consider any just measure, founded upon sound principles, that will benefit tenants of land in Ireland, is of opinion that the leading provisions of the Land Law (Ireland) Bill are in the main economically unsound, unjust, and impolitic,"―(Lord Elcho,)

-instead thereof.

Question again proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."

Debate resumed.

MR. ERRINGTON said, it was obvious that the stage of second reading was not the most convenient for discussing the full details of such a complicated measure as this. There were, however, principles underlying the measure which were novel in their application, and it [Fifth Night.]

« Forrige Fortsett »

Bøker