The new Chairman of Committees, Mr. Mellor, had his first
great struggle on Thursday. He declared that, in discussing a supplemental vote, you could not raise the policy of the original vote, but only the question of how far that original vote ought to be increased. This took the House by surprise, and led to a me16e, in which those who sided with Mr. Mellor, and especially Mr. Sexton, used very much more violent language than those who contested his ruling. Mr. Sexton, for instance, accused the Opposition of "a combined attack to embarrass and intimidate the Chair," for which he never apologised, the chairman not having heard him distinctly, and therefore not having called upon him to apologise. On the whole, we conceive that Mr. Mellor laid down what ought to be the rule in discussing supplemental votes, even if it has often been practically disregarded ; but it is obvious that there are cases to which it could not properly apply. Supposing that the original vote was small, and the supple- mental vote was very much larger than the original vote, it is -clear that the supplemental vote would raise quite a new ques- tion of policy. A. policy on which it might be perfectly wise to spend 25,000, would be very different from a policy on which it would be wise to spend £25,000; and if, therefore, the sup- plemental vote was £20,000, to be added to an original vote of 25,000, it could not fairly be maintained that the question of policy had been properly discussed and settled on the small vote and should not be reopened on the large. With this reserve, we regard Mr. Mellor's ruling as the right ruling, and the ruling most economical of the time of the Committee.
Previous page
