be appointed for the consideration of all
bills relating (1) to law and courts of justice
and legal procedure, and (2) to trade, ship-
ping, and manufactures, which may by order
of the House be committed to them.
The Committee in 1883, when it was com-
posed of Sir John Mowbray (Chairman), Mr
Cubitt (now Lord Ashcombe), Sir Charles
Forster, Mr Mitchell Henry, Mr Orr Ewing,
276 THE WORK OF COMMITTEES. [1874-
Mr Whitbread, Mr Illingworth, and Sir Henry
Drummond Wolff, proceeded to nominate
the members of these two committees, now
better known as Grand Committees. They
were to consist of not less than 60 or more
than 80, which has in practice become 68
to each, with 15 specially added for each
particular bill to be considered by the said
Committee.
The House consists of 670 members, so
that 68 represented one-tenth of the whole
House with one extra. It was, therefore,
fairly easy to start with an arrangement to
give one member on each committee to each
ten members in the House, and to represent
the general balance of parties. The diffi-
culties really began when the details had
to be worked out, and English and Scottish,
Welsh and Irish, Conservatives, Liberals,
and Home Eulers, all had to appear as
nearly as possible in due proportion. I
well remember the endless lists prepared
1899.] GRAND COMMITTEES. 277
to show the exact state of the parties in
the House at the moment, and also the
lists of constituencies, to ensure that all
the great constituencies were represented,
and to prevent a preponderance of manu-
factures over agriculture, or of the coal
interests over the shipping, on the Trade
Committee, and that each of the great in-
dustries of the kingdom should find itself
properly represented. It was many weeks
before the work of constituting these com-
mittees and framing the principles on which
they should be formed was completed to
the satisfaction of the chairman or the com-
mittee. The Leader of the House, the
Leader of the Opposition, and Mr Parnell,
as Leader of the Home Rule party, were
all left out. The existing and late Home
Secretaries and Law Officers were placed, I
may say, ex officio on the Law Committee,
and the Presidents of the Board of Trade
and of the Local Government Board, and
278 THE WORK OF COMMITTEES. [1874-
later on the President of the Board of Agri-
culture, on the Trade Committee.
A chairman's panel is nominated by the
Committee of Selection of not less than four
or more than six members, who appoint
from amonsr themselves the chairman of
each Standing Committee.
In 1894 another, and third, Standing
Committee was set up for the consideration
of all bills relating to Scotland. This com-
mittee was to consist of all members repre-
senting Scottish constituencies, together with
fifteen other members to be nominated by
the Committee of Selection, due regard being
had to the approximation of the balance of
parties in this committee to that of the
whole House. To this committee the Local
Government (Scotland) Bill was committed.
In 1895 a similar order was made for
the above Standing Committee, except that
twenty other members were to be added
instead of fifteen. Since that year this
1899.] STANDING COMMITTEES. 279
particular Standing Committee has not met,
and I think I may add that my father had
little belief in the working of the Scottish
Grand Committee.
The Standing Committees for Law and
Trade were in abeyance during 1885-86-87,
but were revived by Standing Order in 1888,
and have sat since, the two Committees
being nominated at the beginning of each
session.
Since 1888 they have sat fairly regularly
during the session for the consideration of
what may be called non-contentious bills ā
that is, of bills requiring the threshing out
of details, which were accepted by the House
in principle as- a whole.
Of late a practice has been growing up
of referring more contentious bills to them,
measures are hotly fought on party lines,
and the work of a Standing Committee is
often done over again by the House on "the
consideration of Report." It was, I know,
280 THE WORK OF COMMITTEES. [1874-
my father's opinion that the permanent
value of these committees as lightening the
labours of the House could be secured only
by restricting them as far as possible to non-
contentious legislation. The hours of sitting
on the two Standing Committees are from
11.45 or 12 o'clock till 3; but by special
leave from the House these committees have
sat till 4, 5, or even 6 o'clock on bills. The
practice in these committees is the same as
in the House. The chairman sits on a dais
with two clerks on his left, the draftsman
of the bill on his right, with a permanent
official or so of the department to which the
bill relates ; next, the clauses of the bills,
after debate, are considered, amended, or
agreed to, and then reported to the House.
The duty of selecting members to serve
on the Standing Committees is much en-
hanced by the continued shifting that goes
on throughout the session : hardly a week
passes without some "discharge" of a mem-
1899.] "STICK TO COMMITTEES:' 281
ber and some consequent "addition." A
Report to the House has always to follow
each such change, and it may well be under-
stood that "manning" the Standing Com-
mittees has greatly increased the difficulty
of " manning " the Private Bill Committees,
and that the post of Chairman of Selection
(especially towards the end of a session) is
by no means an easy one. My father has
already hinted that members are not quite
so willing as they were to burden themselves
with the work of committees, and the effort
which he never failed to make, of attempting
to consult the convenience of individual
members as to the time when they should
serve, was not the least arduous of the
duties of the post. For himself he valued
committee work most highly, both for the
importance of the interests involved and as
a training for members of the House, ā often
quoting in this, as in other matters, the advice
of Sir Robert Peel, " Stick to committees."
282 THE WORK OF COMMITTEES. [1874-
When the new Parliament met after the
General Election of 1892, my father, who
was then nearing seventy -eight, requested
to be relieved of the duties of the office,
and it was only at the personal solicitation
of Mr Gladstone that he continued to dis-
charge them. He stipulated only that Mr
Whitbread, who had for many years been
the leading; Liberal member on the Com-
mittee, and who had also sent in his resig-
nation, should continue to serve. This was
satisfactorily arranged, and I find in a
letter from my father, through the ordinary
channels of parliamentary communication,
the following : ā
Now that I am assured of the co-operation of
my valued colleague Mr Whitbread, I feel I ought
at once to say that I will place my services at the
disposal of the House. And may I add, in all
sincerity, that gratitude for the support which Mr
Gladstone has always given to the Committee of
Selection constitutes a further reason why I should
comply with your request.
1899.] RESIGNATION OF OFFICE. 283
I have been much helped in this account
of my father's committees by friends and
colleagues who served with him. Perhaps
I may be allowed, in summing up this
record of more than twenty-five years' un-
ostentatious work in the public service, to
quote the resolution passed unanimously by
the Committee, on the motion of a Liberal
seconded by a Conservative : ā
During that long period of time it has been
largely due to the genial tact, personal character,
and unwearying attention of the chairman that
the delicate and difficult duties intrusted to the
Committee of Selection have been carried out
without friction or division, and to the general
satisfaction of the House.
This resolution was passed on my father's
resignation of the office after my mother's
death, in February 1899 ; and I can only
add that the proposal to place by private
subscription some memorial to him, in rec-
ognition of his services, in the Committee-
284 THE WORK OF COMMITTEES. [1874-1899.
room where he had presided so long ā a
proposal unique, I believe, in the annals of
Parliament in the case of a private member
ā is as gratifying to his family as it would
have been unlooked for by himself.
XIII.
LATEK YEAES IN THE HOUSE, 1880-1899
1880-1899.] LATER YEARS IN THE HOUSE. 287
XIII.
LATER YEARS IN THE HOUSE, 1880-1899.
" ie1sh rows " ā lord beaconsfield's death ā the death of
general gordon ā election of mb speakeb peel ā lord
Randolph Churchill's leadership ā death of lord iddes-
leigh ā the 1887 jubilee ā loed bosebery ā a visit to the
crimea ā election of mr gully as speaker ā father of the
house of commons.
The continual " Irish rows," and systematic
obstruction, from 1880 to 1882, were very
distressing to my father. He felt that they
did an injury to the dignity of the whole
House, and that it, and not merely the
Irish party, suffered by them. He was
constant in his attendance at the House,
travelling up through the great snow-
storm of January 18, 1881, ā an experience
288 LATER YEARS IN THE HOUSE. [1880-
described in a letter written the same
evening : ā
& Jan. 18, 1881.
You will be glad to know that I got here safe
and fairly warm, but such a journey I never had
and never dreamt of ! I was not at Padclington
until 8.30 instead of 4.45, no lights and no foot-
warmers. We left Mortimer at 3.35 instead of
3.10, and were outside Heading Station for more
than an hour. There the train due at 3.45 was
also waiting outside, and the points would not act.
We left Eeading about 5.15, and seemed to get on
fairly well to Slough : there we were kept, Heaven
knows why and Heaven knows how long ; but we
were all in the dark, and could not see our watches.
Igain the points refused to work, and I thought we
never should get under weigh ; but at last we did,
and reached Paddington at 8.30. At Eeading we
saw four down trains pass, at Slough five ; at Pad-
dington we were the only train in, three or four
due. Snow fearful, not a cab to be had anywhere.
I believe there will be a division before 12 ; if not,
I shall go by train. I am most thankful to have
got here safely.
It was some months before he entirely got
over the effects of this exposure ā not, I think,
1899.] FORTY-ONE HOURS' SITTING. 289
until after his visit to America in the summer
of 1881.
He took his full share of the prolonged
sittings, being present for many hours of
the memorable fortv-one hours' sitting from
January 31 to February 2, 1881, and again
at that of February 3, when the Irish
members were suspended in a body. He
describes the latter sitting thus : ā
Feb. 4, 1881.
It was an extraordinary scene. I was there all
through, and am none the worse. I bolted a bit
of beef and swallowed a pint of claret whilst some
of the Irish were being carried off, and I heard
all Gladstone's admirable speech. I stuck to the
Government all through, and voted with Walpole
against Northcote. He ought never to have divided.
Gladstone yielded 3 J points out of 4, and it was
ungracious to challenge the small difference that
remained.
Lord Beaconsfield died on April 19, 1881,
and my father attended the funeral at Hugh-
enden.
T
290 LATER YEAES IN THE HOUSE. [1880-
April 27, 1881.
We reached High Wycombe at 1.20. I walked
up to the church. At 2.30 the doors were opened,
and I was one of the first to be admitted : a very-
large number of seats ā perhaps 130 ā were reserved
for the Koyalties, Dukes, mourners, and principal
friends, and some of the servants. All was done
very reverently, and I think all seemed to display
a great deal of real feeling. Coningsby Disraeli
is an interesting boy, ā more like Beaconsfield than
his own father. He and Ralph Disraeli followed
the body ; then Rowton and Barrington, the Execu-
tors, Prince of Wales, Duke of Connaught and
Prince Leopold, Ambassadors, Dukes, Peers, Parts.,
and M.P.'s. We left by the special, and were at
Paddington at G.5.
My father has spoken of his early friend-
ship for Dean Stanley. In July 1881 he
attended the impressive ceremony of the
Dean's funeral in Westminster Abbey.
, July 25, 1881.
A wondrous sight in the Abbey, such a spon-
taneous gathering of men of all shades of opinion.
We met in the Hall, not in the Jerusalem Chamber,
1899.] TWO FUNERALS. 291
and so went in. Names were called out ā Cardinals
Manning and Newman (but I did not see them),
Selborne, Salisbury, Walpole, Gladstone, Northcote.
You will see all the names. I walked with Lord
E. Grosvenor, and was in Henry VII. Chapel and
well placed as we moved up on either side near
the Eoyal Princes. The service lasted nearly an
hour and a half. The Bishop of London told me
he never wished for such a funeral over him, but
would prefer to be buried in a country churchyard.
However, I think the mass of people felt a personal
affection for Stanley.
In December 1882 he was at Addington
for Archbishop Tait's funeral.
Dec. 8, 1882.
I have just come back from Addington, where
we had a very large gathering, although no doubt
the snow, which was six inches deep, kept many
away. I went by a special at 10.50, which con-
veyed the Dukes of Connaught and Albany, the
Archbishop of York, and many bishops. We all
mustered in the house, and then in several pro-
cessions, forming a long line on foot to the church,
about three quarters of a mile off. The three
daughters and Davidson the son-in-law were there.
292 LATER YEARS IN THE HOUSE. [1880-
Staiihope and Craubrook walked together, and my
colleague, John Talbot, and I followed. It was
happily dry overhead except from the dripping of
the trees. The church was quite full, and all
was arranged with becoming solemnity. The Vice-
Chancellor and the Warden of All Souls were the
representatives of the University.
Nov. 15 ; .1883.
We elected Gore Principal Librarian of Pusey
Memorial. The Bishop of Oxford came up, and
Beauchamp, Warden of Keble, Scott-Holland, Lid-
don, &c. I was obliged to come away before all was
over. A very pleasant dinner at Inner Temple.
The G.O.M. very cordial ā actually addressed me as
Mowbray without any prefix ! I sat next to him
in the chamber after dinner, and told him a great
deal about Oxford ; the vote of Convocation about
Luther, which he evidently approved of ; answered
his questions about Driver, &c. No speeches in
Hall, but speeches afterwards ā Derby for Lords,
Gladstone Commons, I for visitors. Montagu
Smith, Erskine May, and sundry people there.
In the course of this Parliament, as will
be well remembered, the more eager spirits
on the Conservative side in the House be-
1899.] THE FOURTH PARTY. 293
came more and more impatient of what they
considered the tame and spiritless leadership
of the Opposition by Sir Stafford Northcote.
The Fourth Party, led by Lord Randolph
Churchill, and composed of Mr Arthur
Balfour, Sir John Gorst, and Sir Henry
Drummond Wolff, sprang into existence.
Night after night they gave expression
to feelings of dissatisfaction below the
gangway, and there was serious danger of
a cleavage in the party. My father, as he
himself has said, regarded Lord Randolph's
career with sympathetic interest from the
first, but he was too old a friend of Sir
Stafford Northcote and too loyal a mem-
ber of the party not to be alarmed at the
prospect. A proposal was set on foot to
present an address of confidence to Sir
Stafford as leader of the Opposition. My
father worked hard to collect signatures,
and the result may be told in the following
letters : ā
294 LATER YEARS IN THE HOUSE. [1880-
April 10, 1883.
My dear Northcote, ā I have great pleasure
in placing in your hands the accompanying ad-
dress, signed by 200 Members of the Conservative
party in the House of Commons (not having held
office in the late Administration), expressing their
confidence and regard. It affords me, as a very
old friend, special gratification that it should have
fallen to my lot to be the medium of making this
communication. ā I remain, my dear Northcote,
yours very sincerely, John Robert Mowbray.
To the Rt. Honhle. Sir Stafford FT. Northcote.
We, the undersigned Conservative members of
Parliament, desire to express to you, in a more
formal way than was done by the very remarkable
and spontaneous outburst in the House last night,
our continued confidence in you as our Leader in
the House of Commons, and our intention to do
our best to strengthen your hands in the very
difficult position which you occupy with so much
devotion.
30 St James's Place, April 10, 1883.
My dear Mowbray, ā I need hardly tell you
with what gratification I have received the re-
1899.] ADDRESS TO SIR S. NORTECOTE. 295
markable document which you have placed in my
hands. Such an expression of confidence will
greatly encourage me ; and I can only say to my
friends that as long as they think my services in
my present position are of any value to the party,
they may rely on my doing my best to justify
their support. Will you kindly convey my best
thanks to those who have signed the address,
comprising, as I believe, nearly all the members
of the Conservative party in the House of
Commons who are within reach, exclusive of
my colleagues in the late Administration. And
you will let me offer my special thanks to yourself
for the trouble you have taken. It adds much to
the pleasure with which I have received this paper
that it comes to me at the hands of so old and so
valued a friend. ā Believe me, yours very faithfully,
Stafford H. Northcote.
This tribute of respect, signed by all the
Conservative members in London except
Lord Randolph Churchill and Mr Newdigate,
no doubt for the time strengthened the hands
of Sir Stafford Northcote, and tended to the
unity of the party.
296 LATER YEARS IN THE HOUSE. [1880-
The session of 1884 opened with the
Bradlaugh case, which is thus referred to : ā
Feb. 8, 1884.
We began well last night. Gladstone was not
up to time. The clock stopped before Bradlaugh
had been speaking ten minutes, and we had a
majority of 58. Our men came up well: out of
244 only 17 were absent and all but 13 in the
House. Bourke was in the House of Lords, Wal-
pole, Coope, and Trevor Lawrence out at the
moment, and only 13 absentees in all parts of the
world, including Sir G. Elliot, who is in Egypt.
Gladstone was feeble and his argument fallacious.
There was everything for a court of law to decide
about affirmation, nothing about the oath.
Feb. 22, 1884.
A very exciting clay. We have just expelled
Bradlaugh and issued a new writ for Northampton.
It remains to be seen if the moderate people there
can carry the day. Northcote has done it right
well. We were nearly in a mess last night when
the Carlton was hot to issue the writ before ex-
pulsion. Bradlaugh himself, by his outrageous
conduct both yesterday and to-day, completed the
case against himself, so all goes on well. You will
1899.] MR BRADLAUGH. 297
observe that I said a very few words at the request
of men about me to keep some of our men straight.
Gladstone behaved scandalously ; he did not vote.
Willie and Herbert Gladstone voted for Bradlaugh.
It is only fair to acid that in after-years
my father, like many others on the Con-
servative side of the House, came to appre-
ciate the many sterling qualities in Mr
Bradlaugh's character. He recognised in him
what he called a thorough House of Commons
man, and he never failed to have a kindly
regard for every man who loyally threw him-
self into the spirit of the place, whichever
side of the House he might sit on.
Although rather before its time, I here
insert an account of the Westminster Play
in 1885, in order not to interrupt the political
part of the narrative.
Dec. 17, 1885.
I went last night to the Westminster Play and
enjoyed it very much. The epilogue, written by
Thompson of Oh. Ch., was capital fun. I found
myself in the antique and dignified position of
298 LATER YEARS IN THE HOUSE. [1880-
occupying the chair and having to ask for the
cup. I first saw the "Andria" fifty-four years
ago, 1831, and the obituary of Old Westminster
included sixteen men who belonged to my gener-
ation. We had Lords Lingen and Brabourne, J.
Talbot, Sir James Paget, and others. The new
President of Magdalen came up to me in the
pleasantest way possible and introduced himself as
one of my constituents.
After the death of Gordon in January
1885 the Opposition proposed to move a
vote of censure on Mr Gladstone's Govern-
ment, and my father wrote on February 18 ā
I believe they have screwed their courage up at
last to move a Vote of Censure. I, who am usually
the most moderate and cautious, find myself on
this occasion one of the most pugnacious, and I
have had to sustain the fainting spirits of some on
the front bench. I maintain that all the traditions
and usages of political life demand a direct vote,
and that the Duke, or Sir Robert Peel, or Lord
Beaconsfield, would have done it, and they must
take the consequences, and Salisbury must come
in and make the best of it if we beat them ā but
1899.] A MEETING AT THE CARLTON. 299
we shan't. I find myself in complete accord with
Sir R. Peel and with Jersey, and Jersey is the most
moderate man, and voted for the Franchise Bill.
There was a meeting at the Carlton, and
a Resolution drawn up by Sir Stafford North-
cote was moved on February 23. On that
date he wrote ā
Our meeting yesterday at the Carlton was not
very full, nor was it much to the purpose. A good
deal of steam was let off against Northcote's Reso-
lution, which is not happily framed ; but o'f course
every one votes for it. We had a disgraceful scene
altogether at the House (on an amendment to the
Address moved by W. O'Brien). Most of our men
behaved badly by walking out, and some voted
with the Irish ; altogether 26 of us voted with the
Government and the Speaker, and 25 voted against
them. It was the first trial of the cloture, and
completely illustrated what I said in 1882, that
Gladstone had drawn his Resolution in such a
complicated way that no Government would be
safe in trying the cloture except when they had 200
of their own men in the House. They were over
40 (there were 20 Irish, 1 Rad., and 25 Conserva-
300 LATER YEARS IN THE HOUSE. [1880-
tives), a majority of 200 was required, and the
Government had only 182, so that they were nearly
beaten; and had the Irish recollected that under
the peculiar circumstances the question had to be
put twice and taken a second division, I am not
sure that some of our men would not have walked
out to embarrass the Government. 1 It was most
annoying to the Speaker, who suggested the motion
entirely in the interests of the House and without
any suggestion from the Government, and he told
me afterwards that he should have resigned if the
motion had failed. John Manners stood to his
guns and voted, but most of our men walked
away. Nothing is known about the division. I
expect the Irish will abstain. They say they
would vote with us if they could turn out the
Government. But of that there seems no prospect.
I suppose Goschen's speech will give us a few
votes, but I expect the Ministerial majority to be
twenty at least.
1 In explanation of this it should be added that, by the
Standing Orders, if the minority were over 40, it required
at least 200 to carry the cloture. In this case the minority
were 46, the Government had only 182 of their own men,
and had to depend on the Conservative Opposition to
furnish the balance required to make up 200.
From a /hoto I)
SPEAKER PEEL.
*
v>
1899.] MB SPEAKER PEEL. 301
It was fourteen only.
Mr Gladstone's Government came to an
end in June 1885, and Lord Salisbury took
office. The dissolution and general election
on the new franchise took place in the
autumn, and in January 1886 the Conserv-
ative Government had to meet a hostile
majority in the new House. The House
met on January 12, and it was a peculiar
gratification to my father to be asked to
propose the re-election of Mr Speaker Peel.
Besides his great admiration for him as
Speaker, he had a special regard for him as
"the son of Sir Kobert and the godson of
the Duke," and was most anxious that his
speech proposing him should be worthy of
the occasion and of the man. After making
it he wrote ā
Jan. 12, 1886.
If I may judge by the compliments, " admirable,"