페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

this manner, was precluded from afterwards addressing the Chapter

XII. house upon the same question, or was heard merely by – the indulgence of the house: 1 but under present usage, the

option of speaking at a subsequent period of the debate has No re been conceded. But in moving a motion for adjournment, served speech on or an amendment, a member cannot avail himself of this moving

· privilege, as he must rise in his place to make the motion,
adjourn-
ment, &c. and thus cannot avoid addressing the house, however

shortly. Accordingly, in such a case, the mover and, in
like manner, the seconder of a motion for an adjournment
or of an amendment have not the power of reserving their
speech until a future occasion during the debate. And as
a member who moves an amendment cannot speak again,
so a member who seconds an amendment is equally unable
to speak again upon the original question, after the amend-
ment has been withdrawn or otherwise disposed of. In Debate on

w going into
both cases, the members have already spoken while the su
original question was before the house, and before the P. 609.
amendment had been proposed from the chair. For
the same reason, a member who has addressed the house
in moving the second reading of a bill, cannot move
the adjournment of the debate, unless an amendment has

been since proposed.
In com 3. In a committee of the whole house the restriction upon

speaking more than once is altogether removed, as will be
more fully explained in speaking of the proceedings of com-

mittees (see p. 385). New

The adjournment of a debate does not enable a member question.

to speak again upon a question, when the discussion is re-
newed on another day, however distant:? but directly a new
question has been proposed, as, “ that this house do now
adjourn,” “that the debate be adjourned,” “the previous

see

mittee.

28th Feb. 1821, 4 H. D. 2. s. , - 21st June, 1892, 5 Parl. Deb. 4 1013.

s. 1744. 2 19th March, 1872, 210 H. D. 3 5 237 H. D. 3 s. 1532; 240 ib. s. 304.

123 ; 241 ib. 1311; 89 Parl, Deb. 4 s. * Mr. Bernal Osborne, 21st July, 1077. 1128. 1851, 118 ib. 1147. 1163; Mr. Lowe, 6 227 H. D. 3 s. 1659. 11th June, 1855, 138 ib. 1300. 1756. 1 C. J. 245.

Chapter question,"1 or an amendment, members are at liberty to
XII.

speak again ; as the rule applies strictly to the prevention
of more than one speech to each separate question proposed :
but a member who has already spoken to a question, or
has moved or seconded an amendment thereto, or a motion
for the adjournment of the debate, may not rise again to
move an amendment, or the adjournment of the house or of
the debate, or any similar question, though he may speak
to these new questions when proposed by other members.
On the 27th October, 1884, an amendment having been
moved to add words to the address in answer to the Queen's
speech, that being the third day of the debate, that amend-
ment was amended, without opposition, by leaving out the
earlier portion of it, when a doubt was raised whether the
amendment so amended had not become a new question,
upon which members who had already spoken might again

address the house : but, after full consideration, it was ruled Point of that it was still the same question. A member, however, Speech on order

point of raised, see who has already spoken, may rise and speak again upon order. p. 349.

a point of order or privilege, if he confines himself to that

subject, and does not refer to the general tenor of a speech.5 Inter. For preserving decency and order in debate, various rules Order in " order, *%) have been laid down, which, in the Lords, are enforced by betona see p. the house itself, and in the Commons by the Speaker in the 345.

first instance, and, if necessary, by the house. The violation
of these rules any member may notice, either by a cry of
"order,” or by rising in his place, and, in the Lords,

addressing the house, and, in the Commons, the Speaker.
Sitting When a member speaks to order, he must simply direct
covered
during a attention to the point complained of, and submit it to the

on, see decision of the Speaker (see p. 349). p. 310,

debate.

division,

1 65 H. D. 3 s. 826.

2 190 ib. 674; 211 ib. 870; 212 ib. 1118.

3 Ten divisions took place, 17th June, 1870, upon questions of adjournment, to defeat the Clerical Disabilities Bill. The rule which prevents a second speech upon the same question was strictly enforced;

and when the minority was reduced to twenty-one, it happened that not more than six members of that party were in a condition to move further adjournments.

• 293 H. D. 3 s. 298; 140 C. J. 10.

195 H. D. 3 s. 2008.

XII.

Rules for The rules for the conduct of debate divide themselves Chapter
members
speaking.

into two parts, viz.: I., such as are to be observed by
members addressing the house ; and, II., those which
regard the behaviour of members listening to the debate.

I. (1) A member, while speaking to a question, may not
allude to debates of the same session upon any question or
bill not then under discussion ; (2) nor speak against or
reflect upon any determination of the house, unless he in-
tends to conclude with a motion for rescinding it; (3) nor
allude to debates in the other house of Parliament; (4) nor
utter treasonable or seditious words, or use the King's
name irreverently, or to influence the debate; (5) nor speak
offensive and insulting words against the character or pro-
ceedings of either house ; (6) nor refer to matters pending
a judicial decision; (7) nor reflect upon the conduct of the
sovereign or of other persons in authority; (8) nor make
personal allusions to members of Parliament; (9) nor

obstruct public business. Referring (1) It is a wholesome restraint upon members, to preto prior de

de vent them from reviving a debate already concluded ; and

there would be little use in preventing the same question
or bill from being offered twice in the same session, if,
without being offered, its merits might be discussed again
and again. The rule, however, is not always strictly
enforced : peculiar circumstances may seem to justify a
member in alluding to a past debate, and the house and
the Speaker will judge, in each case, how far the rule may
fairly be relaxed. On the 30th August, 1841, for instance,
an objection was taken that a member was referring tɔ a
preceding debate, and that it was contrary to one of the
rules of the house. The Speaker said, “That rule applied Personal
in all cases : but where a member had a personal com- tion, see p.
plaint to make, it was usual to grant him the indulgence 319.
of making it.” 2 And again on the 7th March, 1850, he

bates.

i See H. D. 28th Feb. 1845, where Mr. Roche had come from Ireland on purpose to ask Mr. Roebuck a question, but was stopped by Mr.

Speaker; 7th Aug. 1876, 231 H. D. 3 s. 749 ; 238 ib. 1403.

? 59 H. D. 3 s. 486; see also 65 ib. 642, 26th July, 1842.

proc

492.

the me

Chapter said, “ The house is always willing to extend its indulgence,

when an honourable member wishes to clear up any mis.
representation of his character: but that indulgence ought
to be strictly limited to such misrepresentations, and ought
not to extend to any observations other than by way of
correction.” Again, on the 3rd March, 1856, a noble lord
was allowed to refer to a former debate by way of personal
explanation: but directly he proposed to introduce new
matter, he was stopped by the Speaker; and the same

rule was explained and enforced on the 26th February,
No refer- 1858, on the 4th June, 1863, and on other occasions. Nor
ence in de
bate to is a member allowed to refer to a speech made in a com-
committee

nga mittee of the whole house. This rule, however, does not before re- apply to debates upon different stages of a bill; and after port, see p.

the passing of an Act, allusions have been allowed to
debates during its progress, while discussing a proclama-

tion issued under that Act. And upon a motion for
Resolutions practically rescinding a resolution of the house, reference
rescinded,
see p. 300. has been permitted to the debate upon that resolution.*

There appears, however, to be a technical difficulty in the
strict enforcement of the rule in committee, where a debate
in another committee is referred to, as one committee is
not supposed to be cognizant of the debates of another.5
A member may not read any portion of a speech, made in Reading

mi from news-
the same session, from a printed book or newspaper. This
rule, indeed, applies strictly to all debates whatsoever, the
publication of them being a breach of privilege: but of late
years it has been relaxed, by general acquiescence, in favour
of speeches delivered in former sessions. It is also irregular

17th March, 1850 (Mr. Campbell Office, 1877, 235 ib. 1703. and Mr. B. Osborne), 109 H. D. 3 s. 5 In committee of supply, Edu462; see also 30th March, 1846 (Sir J. cation Vote, 12th June, 1856, 142 Graham and Mr. Shaw), 85 ib. 300; ib. 1534. 140 ib. 1708 ; Sir R. Bethell, Mr. 6 203 ib. 1613, &c. Scott, and Mr. Warren, 149 ib. 10 On the 17th May, 1794, Sir W. 14 ; 235 ib. 503. 1192; 236 ib. 36. Young objected to the reading of a 172; Sir W. Marriott, 10 Parl. Deb. speech of Sir R. Walpole : but the 4 s. 523.

Speaker decided it to be regular, 2 154 H. D 3 s. 985.

drawing a distinction between the 3 Royal Titles Act, May 11th, speeches of dead and living mem1876, 129 ib. 374.

bers, 31 Parl. Hist. 527. Controller of the Stationery

papers,

XII.

to read extracts from newspapers, letters, or other docu- Chapter
ments referring to debates in the house in the same session."
Indeed, until 1840, the reading of any extracts from a
newspaper, whether referring to debates or not, had been
restrained as irregular. On the 9th March,1840, the Speaker
having called a member to order, who was reading an
extract cut out from a newspaper, as part of his speech, Sir
Robert Peel said it would be drawing the rule too tightly
if members were restrained from reading relevant extracts
from newspapers; and with the acquiescence of the house,
the member proceeded to read the passage from the news-
paper. On the 14th February, 1856, when a member was
called to order for reading an extract from a newspaper, the
Speaker stated that, on a former occasion when he had
attempted to enforce this rule, he had been overruled by
the house. On the 9th March, 1857, in committee of

supply, the chairman made a similar statement.3
Reflecting (2) The objections to the practice of referring to past
upon votes
of the

"* debates apply, with greater force, to reflections upon votes

of the house, unless made for the purpose of justifying a
motion that the vote be rescinded. Those reflections not
only revive discussion upon questions already decided, but
are wholly irregular, inasmuch as the member is himself
included in, and bound by, a vote agreed to by a majority.
Reflections also on the action taken by the Speaker, the See also
chairman of ways and means, and the house upon a closure mogure, P-

motion are not permitted."
Allusions (3) The rule that allusions to debates in the other house
to debates
in the

are out of order, prevents fruitless arguments between
members of two distinct bodies who are unable to reply to
each other, and guards against recrimination and offensive
language, in the absence of the party assailed: but it is

house.

1 27th Feb. 1846 (Mr. Ferrand), H. D. 3 s. 1123 ; 186 ib. 885. 84 H. D. 3 s. 232; also 154 ib. 1200 ; 5328 ib. 1899; 329 ib. 58 ; 354 ib. 162 ib. 1885 ; 168 ib. 1198; 183 ib. 431; 9 Parl. Deb. 4 s. 450; 10 ib. 826; 191 ib. 2030 ; 206 ib. 1330; 208 1411; 11 ib. 1839; 12 ib. 412-423. ib. 1604; 241 ib. 831.

835. 1197–1202; 16 ib. 1968; 39 ib. 2 52 ib. 1063-1065.

867 ; 40 ib. 1731 ; 61 ib. 863; 110 ib. 3 140 ib. 764 ; 144 ib. 2106.

499, 510; 151 ib. 980. + 2 Hatsell, 234, n.; see also 185

other

house.

« 이전계속 »