sequently the compact was that Ireland should be left out of the bill. Thus, according to the views laid down by the Government, a measure forced upon this country by Irish votes was local option for England. For his own part he approved

of the principle of the bill and should vote for it. In Committee, however, he should move to include Ireland in its operation, and if that proposal were resisted by the temperance party he should do his best to prevent the third reading of the bill. No objection having been raised to the introduction of the measure, it was brought in and formally read a first time without a division.

The negotiations and intrigues which had been set in motion by the premature announcement of the Speaker's retirement had been actively going on for some time before the critical moment arrived. The only point on which the two sides could agree was that the election of the new Speaker should take place before the Easter recess. Consequently Mr. Peel (April 8) asked leave to intervene before the ordinary business of the day to announce his retirement, which, as he explained, was necessitated by considerations of health. In stately and modest language he referred to the eleven years during which he had occupied the chair, and expressed his thanks to all sides of the House for their support in sessions of storm and stress, as well as in periods of comparative repose. He referred also to the changes which had been made during his tenure of office in the procedure of the House, adding that although standing orders and rules, when enacted and in force, ought to be observed both in the letter and in the spirit, yet that neither rules nor standing orders of the House were of permanent obligation. "They must change as circumstances change. One thing, I venture to think, is absolutely essential, and that is that we should pay regard to those honourable traditions, to that great code of law, unwritten though it be, which is of imperative and stringent obligation, if that continuity of sentiment is to be maintained to which all institutions owe so much, to which this House has at all times attached so much value, and to the observance of which it owes so many inestimable advantages. Finally, let me say a few parting words in conclusion; and I wish to speak not with the brief remnant of authority which is still left to me with the sands of my official life rapidly running out, I would rather speak as a member of thirty years' experience in this House who speaks to his brother members and comrades, if I may dare to use the term. I would fain hope that by the co-operation of all its members this House may continue to be a pattern and a model to foreign nations, and to those great peoples who have left our shores and have carried our blood, our race, our language, our institutions, and our habits of thought to the uttermost parts of the earth. I would fain indulge in the belief and the hope, and as I speak with the

traditions of this House and its glorious memories crowding on my mind that hope and that belief become stronger and more emphasised, though with both hope and belief I would couple the earnest but humble prayer that this House may have centuries of honour, of dignity, of usefulness, before it, and that it may continue to hold, not a prominent only, but a first and foremost position among the legislative assemblies of the world."

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in a few eloquent sentences, expressed the heartfelt regret aroused by Mr. Peel's announcement, and Mr. Balfour spoke of the grief with which. he had listened to the Speaker's decision. On the following day the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in his most felicitous style, moved that the thanks of the House be given to the Speaker for his distinguished services. He began by quoting from the speech which Mr. Peel himself had made more than eleven years before on his election to the chair, in which, in dignified phrase, he divested himself, for the future, of all that was personal, all that was of party, all that savoured of political predilection, and subordinated everything to the great interests of the House at large. Those honourable pledges, said Sir William Harcourt, had been honourably fulfilled. The leader of the House proceeded to enumerate the many high qualities which were required in a Speaker, and declared, amid approving cheers, that Mr. Peel had shown that he possessed them all, with the result that he had won, not only the reverence and respect of the House, but its esteem and affection. It would be some satisfaction to the Speaker to know, in his retirement, how highly valued by that great assembly were his distinguished services, and that he added another name to the most illustrious in the House, and exalted the dignity of a station the highest which an English gentleman could hold. Mr. Balfour was equally happy in seconding the motion, and he declared that never before was an ancient formula charged with such an amount of feeling. There had been great changes during Mr. Peel's term of office, for not only had questions been mooted which had aroused party passions to fever heat, but a new responsibility had been thrown upon the Speaker himself which none of his predecessors had shared, and though it was prophesied at the time that it would be impossible for the Speaker to be in future, as he had been in the past, the impartial mouthpiece, not of one party only, but of the House as a whole, those prophecies had not been fulfilled. By the great qualities which Mr. Peel had displayed, that crisis in the history of the House had been safely passed, for it had been given to him to show, in the chair, that kind of authority which no rules and no privileges could give, which could not be conferred even by the support of the House, but which must be inborn in the man, and Mr. Balfour hoped it might be the lot of the House to find other men who, he would not say would

equal Mr. Peel, but who might approach him at all events in the exercise of that incommunicable gift. It would be said of Mr. Peel not only that he had filled a great place in a long line of illustrious Speakers-perhaps the greatest place for many generations past-but that each several member of the House had always found in him a kind and considerate guide. The two leaders of the House having spoken, it was thought fitting that their views should be endorsed and emphasised by other prominent members who lead parties or sections of the House, so Mr. Justin M'Carthy on behalf of the Irish Nationalists, Mr Chamberlain of the Liberal Unionists, Mr. John Redmond of the Parnellites, and Mr. Naoroji, the selfconstituted spokesman for the natives of India, each in turn had something gracious and graceful to say of Mr. Peel and his services.

The resolution having been agreed to nem. con., Mr. Peel addressed the House, all members being uncovered, confessing that he had been deeply touched by the various speeches delivered, and that he had a deep and abiding sense of gratitude for the personal kindness shown to him from every quarter of the House-a kindness which added much to the poignancy and accentuated his feelings on leaving the chair, but the memory of which would, after a short time, mitigate in him the inevitable pain of parting.

The proceedings which marked the election of Mr. Peel's successor were less harmonious. All attempts to obviate a contest had failed, the Liberals claimed the right of the majority, and refused to put forward the only member of their body who would have been accepted by the Opposition. Several names had from time to time been mentioned as possible nominees, but for some days before the election it was known that the Ministerial candidate would be Mr. W. C. Gully, whilst the Opposition intended to propose Sir M. White Ridley. On the day following Mr. Peel's retirement (April 10) the Serjeant brought the mace and laid it under the table, whereupon the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Sir William Harcourt) acquainted the House that the Queen, having been informed of Mr. Peel's resignation, gave leave to the House to proceed forthwith to the choice of a new Speaker. Mr. Whitbread Luton, Bedfordshire), whose connection with the House had been of such duration that on two previous occasions he had been mentioned as a possible occupant of the Speaker's chair, moved that Mr. William Court Gully should take the chair. He expressed his regret that upon this occasion the practice which had endured for more than half a century was likely to be broken, and that the selection of those who formed the majority of the House was to be questioned. Possibly it might be objected that Mr. Gulfy had not so long a Parliamentary experience as some would desire. On the last occasion when there was a contest for the Speakership, in 1839, exactly

the same objection was urged against Mr. Shaw-Lefevre, who, like the present member for Carlisle, had been only nine years in Parliament, but the House, believing that they saw in Mr. Shaw-Lefevre the gifts which went to make a great Speaker, disregarded that objection. The choice then made was ratified in succeeding Parliaments by both parties for a period of eighteen years. In truth there were considerations of more vital importance than a close acquaintance with the rules of the House. It was of the highest importance to select a man who had an evenly-balanced mind and an ever-present courtesy which would enable him to conciliate even those whom it was his duty to reprove. Moreover, he ought to possess that firmness, decision, and self-reliance which came to a man who had learned to make his own mark in life and to depend upon himself. These were things which could not be picked up; they must be innate and possessed. It could not be seriously contended that the fact of Mr. Gully's belonging to the legal profession rendered him unfit to take the chair. His hon. friend, fortunately, had abstained from throwing himself into the heat of party conflict, and had raised no animosities. If elected, Mr. Gully would look upon the House from a plane above the passing interests of parties and the conflicts of the hour, and would be able worthily to maintain their privileges and to hand down their traditions.

Sir J. Mowbray (Oxford University), whose Parliamentary service was perhaps of as long duration as Mr. Whitbread's, moved that Sir Matthew White Ridley, member for Blackpool, should be elected to the Speakership. He demurred to the proposition that the selection of a Speaker rested with the majority, and asserted that it rested with the House at large. They ought to choose for their Speaker a man who was essentially one of themselves, and who had received his training within those walls, and not in the courts of law. Dwelling on the qualifications of Sir M. White Ridley, he said that that gentleman first entered the House in 1868 with a brilliant reputation from Oxford and Cambridge, and in six Parliaments he had been an active and useful member. He had served on many select committees; for years he had been chairman of a standing committee; and he had also undertaken the chairmanship of the Scotch Grand Committee. From 1877 to 1881 he was one of the commissioners for making statutes for the University of Oxford, and from 1886 to 1890 he acted as chairman of another royal commission, which was known by his name. Moreover, he had been Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, and he had likewise filled the important office of Financial Secretary to the Treasury. In brief, Sir M. White Ridley came to them with all those credentials which for the last half-century had recommended to them the great Speakers who had occupied the chair during that period.

Both the members nominated "humbly submitted" them

H

selves to the judgment of the House, and expressed their willingness to place their services at its disposal.

Under ordinary circumstances the vote would have been taken at once, but on this occasion the precedent was departed from by Mr. Balfour, who said he did not deem it consistent with his public duty to preserve silence on this occasion, as the course adopted by the Government was unprecedented and dangerous to the future efficiency of the proceedings of the House. He would have liked to hear something about the special Parliamentary qualifications of the member for Carlisle. It was not too much to say that that gentleman was absolutely unknown to them in his Parliamentary capacity. Mr. Gully had never opened his lips in debate, had never served on a private bill or select committee, and had never attended a grand committee. The records of Parliament would be searched in vain for an instance of a party or a Government selecting as their candidate for this high office any man who had not made himself thoroughly acquainted with the rules and procedure of the House, not by getting them up out of a book, but by constant study and attendance and work in the House. In selecting the hon. member for Carlisle her Majesty's Government had broken all the traditions which had prevailed during the last century. Therefore it must be remembered that the Tory or Unionist party would not, in changed circumstances, think themselves compelled to follow the precedent which had been set.

It was impossible for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to allow these remarks to pass without a reply, which, moreover, afforded him the opportunity of placing before the House the Ministerial version of the events of the past few weeks. He began by expressing his deep regret that the leader of the Opposition had by his intervention given a party character to the debate. He next reminded the House that on a similar occasion objection had been raised by the Conservatives to the election of Mr. Peel on the ground that he was comparatively unknown in the House. The charge that the Government had endeavoured to impose upon the House the choice of a Speaker was absolutely unfounded. Their opponents must have known that the first object of the Government was to secure, if possible, a unanimous election. It was perfectly well known that the object of the Government was to place in the chair the man who, of all others, was most fitted to occupy it. The friends of that gentleman who politically acted with him had officially declared that they were willing and anxious to support his election, but that, as their Tory allies were determined on a particular candidate, they must withdraw that support. If it had not been for that compact there would have been, if not a unanimous election to the chair, at all events an election by an overwhelming majority of more than 100. With regard to Mr. Campbell-Bannerman, the Secretary of State for War, being a