ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

Cases of breach of

new writs.

VIII.

the member affected by the breach of privilege.1 Motions Chapter
founded on a breach of privilege are also entertained upon
the consideration of a report from a select committee Orders for
directing the attention of the house to the matter with a in the
view to action being taken thereon (see p. 128).

8

attendance

house, see P. 64.

notice

notice is

The quality of privilege, and the consequent right of Position on privilege. immediate consideration, does not depend solely on the paper of privilege nature and object of the motion, but may be imparted or matters, withdrawn by the circumstances that attend the motion. see p. 275. Motion for As a matter affecting the seat of a member of the house is a matter of privilege,2 precedence is accorded to a motion for a new writ, when such motion is made without notice: 3 When but that right ceases when notice of a motion for a new requisite, see p. 635. writ is prescribed by a resolution of the house, in cases of seats declared void for bribery and treating (see p. 635). Again, on the 24th March, 1882, precedence was claimed for a motion for a new writ for the borough of Northampton; but the Speaker stated that such motions were founded upon recent events, e.g. the death of a member, his acceptance of office, or the report of election judges: but as the object of the motion was to raise an irregular debate upon the claim of Mr. Bradlaugh to take the oath, it was not entitled to privilege. So also, when, during the session Libellous of 1887, a motion was brought forward based on charges charges. brought by the Times newspaper against certain members of the house (see p. 78), the motion was ruled not to be a motion of privilege, because it was not a matter requiring immediate consideration, and because the charges did not touch the conduct of members in the house: 5 but subsequently, in the year 1890, a motion bearing on the subject of those charges, asserting that they were a libel on the house, was treated as of privilege, being brought forward

4

1 Complaint, Sir C. Lewis, 3rd May, 1887, 142 C. J. 208.

2 16th April, 1864; seat of fifth under secretary of state, 119 ib. 174. 3 17th April, 1879, 245 H. D. 3 s. 518; 25th Aug. 1881, 265 ib. 886. The right of privilege was also ac

corded to a motion to rescind a reso-
lution of the house affecting the
seat of a member, 23rd June, 1880,
253 ib. 644.

* 267 ib. 1821.

5 22nd Feb. 1887, 311 ib. 286.

VIII.

Chapter at the earliest moment, the first day of the session, and because the charges were undoubtedly designed to influence the proceedings of the house.1 Nor does a motion embodying a matter of privilege, such as a motion to rescind a resolution of the house affecting the seat of a member, lose its right of privilege, because the motion may have been deferred some days to suit the convenience of the house.2 A question of order in the house, or in a committee Criminal thereof, cannot be treated as a matter of privilege; and, Casos no

commitnents, see p. 115.

5

within

as the privilege of freedom from arrest is limited to civil privilege.
causes, and cannot be pleaded to arrests made on a criminal
charge, or to enforce the administration of justice, the
circumstances attending such arrest or imprisonment
cannot be brought before the house as a matter of
privilege. A letter addressed by a member to the Speaker
regarding his arrest cannot be treated as a matter of
privilege, nor the failure of a judge or committing
magistrate to notify a member's arrest; 6 though, an
objection having been taken to the terms of a magistrate's
letter communicating to the house the imprisonment of
a member, a motion made without notice was permitted,
that the letter was a breach of privilege. The circum-
stances connected with the committal of members for
contempt of court have, however, been considered as a
matter of privilege (see p. 119), but the Speaker has
refused to allow the committal of a member for a criminal
contempt of court to be so raised. The issue of an order
of attachment against a member by a judge of the high
court of justice in Ireland has not been allowed to be
discussed as a matter of privilege, inasmuch as until the

1 11th Feb. 1890, the Times and Mr. Parnell, 341 H. D. 3 s. 43; see also 156 C. J. 414.

2 12th May, 1881, 261 H. D. 3 s. 282-285.

3 5th April, 1878, 239 ib. 671; 2nd Feb. 1881, 258 ib. 8-14; 339 ib. 1223; 90 Parl. Deb. 4 s. 698.

* See debate on Mr. P. O'Brien's arrest, 13th Feb. 1888, 322 H. D 3 s. P.

262-267; 92 Parl. Deb. 4 s. 1062;
101 ib. 61; 109 ib. 477; 123 ib. 309.
31st May, 1881, 261 H. D. 3 s.

1785.

6113 Parl. Deb. 4 s. 14.

14th May, 1888, 326 H. D. 3 s. 177. 183; 143 C. J. 222.

8123 Parl. Deb. 4 s, 309. See also p. 122, n. 1.

T

[blocks in formation]

VIII.

member was arrested he was not prevented from attending Chapter
the house.1 A motion to rescind a resolution for the
suspension of a member is not entitled to the position of
a matter of privilege.2

[ocr errors]

members,

To justify the claim of privilege for a motion complaining Libels on of alleged libels on members, the conduct and language on see p. 81. which the libel is based must be actions performed or words uttered in the actual transaction of the business of the house. On this ground a charge made by a newspaper against a member, that a statement he made in the house. was false, received the priority accorded to a matter of privilege. And although privilege cannot be claimed for a motion containing imputations upon the character of a member which are not immediately connected with his conduct in Parliament, yet, owing to attendant circumstances, these motions occasionally have been treated as privileged motions.5 For instance, when, 22nd July, 1861, a motion was proposed concerning the conduct of a member in connection with a joint stock company, such conduct being wholly unconnected with matters arising in the house, the Speaker said it was doubtful whether the motion was properly a matter of privilege, but as it affected the character of a member, it could be proceeded with, if it were the pleasure of the house."

1 106 Parl, Deb. 4 s. 1335.

2 18th April, 1887, 313 H. D. 3 s. 1124. On 7th March, 1901, the Speaker granted precedence to a motion to rescind the suspension of a member under the special circumstances of the case, as a letter from the member, who had been suspended on the report of the chairman of ways and means, raised a strong prima facie case of error in the report, 90 Parl. Deb. 4 s. 831.

3 See Speaker's rulings, case of the postal clerks, 22nd June, 1881, 262 H. D. 3 s. 1036; complaint against the Times, 22nd Feb. 1887, 311 ib. 286; complaint by Mr. Sexton against Mr. Brodrick, 25th April, 1887, 313 ib. 1803; Mr. J. M.

Cameron's complaint, 15th March,
1888, 323 ib. 1312; complaint by
Mr. Sexton against Sir W. Marriott
(after excepted passages had been
read at the table), 28th March, 1890,
343 ib. 181-187; 145 C. J. 221; com-
plaint of Mr. Havelock Wilson
against St. James's Gazette, 17th
March, 1896, 38 Parl. Deb. 4 s.
1177; complaint against Mr. Lynch
in connection with Galway election
of his claim to have served with
the king's enemies, 101 ib. 58.

3rd May, 1887, 314 H. D. 3 s.
717, 142 C. J. 208; 156 ib. 356.

16th March, 1864, 174 H. D. 3 s. 306; 5th July, 1877, 235 ib. 829. 6164 ib. 1285.

Chapter
VIII.

claim of

Because a motion has been treated as of privilege, that When right cannot be claimed for subsequent motions bearing on privilege the same subject. On the 5th July, 1860, Lord Palmerston failed. proposed resolutions founded on the report of the committee on Tax Bills, as a matter of privilege, before the orders of the day but on the 17th, Lord Fermoy having given notice of another resolution on that subject, the Speaker held that he was not entitled to precedence, his object being merely to review a former determination of the house; and the same ruling was applied to a motion to add names to a select committee appointed as a matter of privilege, and to the reports of such committees.3 In like manner, when the house has decided upon the principle raised by a privileged motion, the same principle cannot be brought forward as privilege, in another form, during the same session.1

Opposition by a direct vote given against a motion involving a matter of privilege, is not essential: these motions can be set aside indirectly, as, for instance, by an amendment proposing that the house should pass to the appointed business of the sitting,5 or by the adoption of the previous question.

notice

A motion or an order of the day relating to a matter of Position of privilege privilege is either placed at the head of the notice paper, motions on above the other orders of the day, and without a number, paper. so that it is called on immediately after the motions that may be set down for consideration at the commencement of public business (see p. 257); or the order is called on before the other orders of the day, or before notices, if the order has not received that precedence upon the notice paper.8

1 159 H. D. 3 s. 2035.

* 28th May, 1880, 252 H. D. 3 s. 667.788.

* 275 ib. 228; 332 ib. 77; 112 Parl. Deb. 4 s. 287.

20th July, 1887, 317 H. D. 3 s. 1489.

135 C. J. 57; 139 ib. 167; 142 ib. 358; 143 ib. 420; 149 ib. 33; 155 ib. 179.

6135 ib. 57; 148 ib. 631; 160 ib. 3. See also 2 Cavendish Deb. 385.

Toadjourned debates on privilege cases a similar position is assigned. Case of the printers, 1837, 1840, 92 C. J. 450; 38 H. D. 3 s. 1249; 95 C. J. 13. 15. 19. 23. 70; 51 H. D. 3 s. 196. 251. 358. 422; 52 ib. 7; case of Azeem Jah, 1865, 120 C. J. 252; Mr. Plimsoll's case, 226 H. D. 3 s. 178; see also 238 ib. 1741.

8 Carlow and other election cases, 91 C. J. 24. 42, and votes; 31 H. D. 3 s. 272; 97 C. J. 263; Mr. Roebuck

Claim of

overruled

from the chair.

the

VIII.

As precedence is naturally desired by members, care has Chapter privilege been taken, by rulings from the chair, not to extend that claim to any motion which does not strictly relate to an Duties of urgent matter of privilege, properly so called;1 and many Speaker, motions, more or less affecting privilege, have been brought on in their turn, with other notices of motions.2

(Chiltern Hundreds), 155 H. D. 3 s.
945, &c.; Mr. Bright (Pontefract
election), ib. 1254; 114 C. J. 357.
362. 376; case of printers, 92 ib. 436;
case of Washington Wilks: votes,
1st and 2nd June, 1858; 3rd July,
1882, 271 H. D. 3 s. 1303; Report on
Yorkshire, &c., Insurance Com-
pany, 23rd July, 1889, 338 ib. 1089.

1 146 H. D. 3 s. 769; 159 ib. 2035;
174 ib. 190. 306; 187 ib. 14; 235 ib.
829; 239 ib. 671; 252 ib. 667. 788;
261 ib. 694. 1785; 262 ib. 1035; 266

ib. 788; 51 Parl. Deb. 4 s. 311; 92
ib. 376; 108 ib. 204-206; 134 ib. 777;
see also n. 3, p. 274.

2 Mr. Isaac Butt's notice relating
to the Times newspaper, 7th Feb.
1854, 109 C. J. 40; Mr. C. Forster's
motion for a committee on the for-
gery of signatures to petitions, 23rd
March, 1865, 120 ib. 157; Mr.
Callan's motion for a committee to
inquire how Mr. Newdegate's name
was affixed to a petition, 7th April,
1876, &c.

see p. 192.

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »