XII. Chapter for an explanation from the member who had so offended, required him to withdraw the words, and to apologize to the house.1 See also disorder in com 386. tions in Indecent interruptions of the debate or proceedings, in Interrupa committee of the whole house, are regarded in the same committee. mittee, P. light as similar disorders while the house is sitting. On the 27th February, 1810, the committee on the Expedition to the Scheldt reported that a member had misbehaved himself during the sitting of the committee, making use of profane oaths and disturbing their proceedings. Mr. Fuller, the member complained of, was heard to excuse himself; in doing which he gave great offence by repeating and persisting in his disorderly conduct; upon which Mr. Speaker called upon him by name, and he was ordered to withdraw. It was immediately ordered, nem. con., that "for his offensive words and disorderly conduct he be taken into the custody of the Serjeant." The member further aggravated his offence by breaking from the Serjeant, and returning into the house in a very violent and disorderly manner, whence he was removed by the Serjeant and his messengers, upon an order given by the Speaker.2 On the 9th June, 1852, the house being in committee, Mr. F. O'Connor interrupted the proceedings of the committee by disorderly and offensive conduct towards a member, and the chairman was directed to report the same to the house. On the Speaker resuming the chair, a motion was made that Mr. O'Connor do attend in his place forthwith: but it was represented that on the previous day he had been disorderly and had apologized, and that it was fruitless to deal with him again in the same manner. While his conduct was under discussion, he twice entered the house and approached the chair of Mr. Speaker, and then withdrew. It was thus obvious to the house that he must be dealt with summarily; and it was accordingly ordered, nem. con., that for his disorderly conduct and contempt of Misbe haviour in the house, he be taken into the custody of the Serjeant-at- Chapter arms.1 Again in committee, on the declaration of the numbers taken at a division, an interchange of insulting words between two members formed the subject of complaint: but, after an explanation, the words were mutually withdrawn.2 XII. In cases of disorder, the jurisdiction of the house is also the lobbies. extended to the lobbies. On the 11th April, 1877, on the numbers being declared after a division, complaint was made to the house, by Mr. Sullivan, of an offensive expression addressed to him by Dr. Kenealy, in the side lobby, during the division just taken. Mr. Speaker observed that, See the Speaker's had the expression complained of been used in the house, duties, p. it would have been his duty to deal with the matter on his 194, n. 2. own authority: but as the complaint referred to words used in the lobby, he left it to the consideration of the house; and Mr. Speaker called upon Dr. Kenealy to explain his conduct. Dr. Kenealy was heard in his place; and, having admitted that he had used the expression complained of, desired to submit his conduct to the decision of the house : after which he withdrew. It was then resolved that he be ordered to withdraw the offensive expression, and to apologize to the house for having used it. Dr. Kenealy being called in, the Speaker acquainted him with the resolution of the house, and he withdrew the offensive expression complained of, and apologized to the house for having used it. On a subsequent occasion, 18th July, 1887, insulting words addressed by a member to another member in the outer lobby, were brought under the cognizance of the house.1 1 On the 16th June he was dis- 13th Aug. 1890, 145 ib. 572. the Speaker, as a point of order, re- Chapter In the enforcement of all these rules for maintaining Authority of Speaker. order, the Speaker of the House of Lords has no more Lords. authority than any other peer, except in so far as his own personal weight, and the dignity of his office, may give effect to his opinions, and secure the concurrence of the Position of house. The result of his imperfect powers is that a peer Speaker, see p. 191. who is disorderly is called to order by another peer, perhaps of an opposite party; and that an irregular argument is liable to ensue, in which each speaker imputes disorder to the last, and recrimination takes the place of orderly debate. There is no impartial authority to whom an appeal can be made, and the debate upon a question of order generally ends with satisfaction to neither party, and without any decision upon the matter to which exception had been taken. order, see p. 323. order to Duties of In so large and active an assembly as the House of Commons. Speaker, see p. 192. Commons, it is absolutely necessary that the Speaker Question of should be invested with authority to repress disorder, and to give effect, promptly and decisively, to the rules and orders of the house. The ultimate authority upon all points is the house itself: but the Speaker is the executive officer, by whom its rules are enforced. In ordinary cases, the breach of order is obvious, and is immediately checked by the Speaker; in other cases, Question of if his attention is directed to a point of order at the Point of proper moment, namely, the moment when the alleged be raised violation of order occurred,' he at once gives his decision, and calls upon the member who is at fault, to conform to the rule as explained from the chair. But doubtful cases may arise, upon which the rules of the house are indistinct or obsolete, or do not apply directly to the point at issue; when the Speaker, being left without specific directions, refers the matter to the judgment of the house. On the 27th April, 1604, it was "agreed for a rule, that if any doubt arise upon the bill, the Speaker is to explain, but not to sway the house with argument or dispute;" and order during a division, see pp. 310, 357. 1 22nd March, 1872, 210 H. D. 3 s. also Mr. Speaker Denison's Diary, forthwith. Speaker always to be heard. Power of Speaker and Chair man to order a withdraw from the S. O. 18, in all doubtful matters this course is adopted by the Chapter Speaker.1 XII. Speaker's p. 278. Whenever the Speaker rises to interpose, in the course Motions on of a debate, he is to be heard in silence, and the member the who is speaking, or offering to speak, should immediately conduct, see sit down, nor should members leave their seats while the Speaker addresses the house; 3 and members who do not maintain silence, or who attempt to address the Speaker, are called to order by the majority of the house, with loud cries of "order" and "chair." Of late years, the authority of the chair in maintaining order has received an accession of strength by standing order No. 18, session 1882, "Suspension of members" (see member to p. 340), and by standing order No. 20, session 1888, which empowers the Speaker or the chairman to order a member house. whose conduct is grossly disorderly to withdraw immeAppendix I. diately from the house during the remainder of that day's sitting; or if the Speaker or the chairman deems that the Appendix I. powers conferred by this standing order are inadequate to deal with the offence, he may, in accordance with standing order No. 18, name such member; or he may call on the house to adjudge upon his conduct. S. O. 20, Withdrawal from the Members ordered to withdraw in pursuance of this standing order, or who are suspended from the service precincts. of the house in pursuance of standing order No. 18, must withdraw forthwith from the precincts of the house," subject, however, in the case of members under suspension, to the proviso regarding their service on private bill committees. Members It is a rule in both houses, that when the conduct of a Withdrawal, to when member is under consideration, he is to withdraw during the personal with Chapter debate. The practice is to permit him to learn the charge against him, and, after being heard in his place, for him to withdraw from the house. The precise time at which he should withdraw is determined by the nature of the charge. When it is founded upon reports, petitions, or other documents, or words spoken and taken down, which sufficiently explain the charge, it is usual to have them read, and for the member to withdraw before any question is proposed.1 But if the charge be contained in the question itself, the member is heard in his place, and withdraws after the question has been proposed; as in the cases of Mr. Secretary Canning, in 1808; 2 and of Lord Brudenell, in 1836.8 If the member should neglect or refuse to withdraw, at the proper time, the house would order him to withdraw. Thus, in the Lords, Lord Pierpoint, in 1641, and Lord Herbert of Cherbury, in 1642, were commanded to withdraw; and in the Commons, in 1715, it was ordered, upon question and division, "that Sir W. Wyndham do now withdraw."5 When a member's conduct has not been directly impugned by the form of the question, he has continued in the house and voted." When Mr. John Bright, 18th June, 1883, had been heard in reply to a motion that words he had uttered amounted to a breach of privilege, the Speaker reminded him that he should withdraw. Mr. Bright, however, expressed a wish to remain in his place. The Speaker ascertained the general sense of the house, and Mr. Bright's withdrawal was not required." And, acting in like manner, when a member against whose conduct a complaint was made, having been first heard, had withdrawn, on the expression of a desire that See the cases of Lord Coningesby, in 1720, 21 L. J. 450; Sir F. Burdett, in 1810, 65 C. J. 224; Sir T. Troubridge, in 1833, 88 ib. 470; Mr. O'Connell, in 1836, 91 ib. 42; Mr. S. O'Brien, in 1846, 101 ib. 582; Mr. Isaac Butt, in 1858, 113 ib. 68; Mr. Lever, in 1861, 116 ib. 377. 381; see also Mr. Plimsoll's case, 1873, 128 ib. 61. 2 63 ib. 149. 3 91 ib. 319. 4 4 L. J. 476; 5 ib. 77. 5 18 C. J. 49. • Mr. Stansfeld, 17th March, 1864, 174 H. D. 3 s. 340. 7 280 ib. 812; 138 C. J. 280. |