EQUIPMENT SEIZED.

Press, Volume L, Issue 14975, 23 May 1914, Page 11

EQUIPMENT SEIZED.

Customs officials at Dublin seized a consignment of .bayonets, haversacks, and bandoliers, believed to havo been intended for tho Nationalist Volunteers. (Eecoivcd May 22nd, 10.15 p.m.) LONDON, Mar 22. Mr Asqtrith said tho introduction of the amending Bill in tho House of Lords was duo to no disrespect to the House of Commons, which rotained tho ultimate determining authority. Tho Government's plan was tho only course giving any prospect of a pacific settlement.

Mr Bonar Law said it was noC"?i*r to tlio House of Commons to be asked to finally pass the Homo Itulo Bill without knowing the Government's real proposals. Mr Asquith was refusing to tell the House of Commons the tonus of tho amending Bill because the , . Nationalists would not permit, him to.

Sir Henry Dalziel urged tho Government to state tho nature of tho amendments. Personally he did not want to sco any advance upon Mr Asquitli's offer made on March 9th, hut tho House of Commons ought not to give its vote in the dark.

After the motion for tho adjournment of the debate had been lost, a section of tho Opposition evidently determined not to allow the debate to continue.

.Ministerialists cried "Order!" and tho Opposition replied "No, adjourn!" Tho front Opposition benches were silent. Big groups did not participate, but a rowdy minority made it impossible for Mr Campbell to proceed. '

Tho Speaker's unexpected question whether Mr Bonar Law supported and approved of tho disorder arousod a storm of angry protest and cries of "Don't answer."

Mr Bonar Law's definite reply was received with exultant Opposition cheering and the waving of handkerchiefs and order papers. Tho Conservatives raised a triumphant cheer as tho mace was removed and trooped into the lobby enthusiastically acclaiming Mr Bonar Law. Liberals, Nationalists, and Labour members throughout refrained from retaliation, and loudly cheered Mr Asquith on leaving the House. Mr Page Croft retorted by calling for three cheers for "King JohnThere is considerable difference of opinion regarding the propriety of the Speaker's question, as it was practic--3% askina Hr Bonar to to censaia.

his followers. The fact is recalled that -ho Speaker in 1005, on a similar occasion, appealed to Sir Henry CampbellBannerman to cheek disorder, and Sir Henry, who was then Leiluer of the ■.imposition, declined.