페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

members.

the member might return to the house whilst a rejoinder Chapter

XII. was made to his explanation, the Speaker sanctioned the return of the member to his place, until the consideration of the member's conduct was commenced by the house. And when doubt has arisen in debate in regard to a member's explanation of his conduct, he has been recalled and allowed to submit a further explanation to the house, after which he has again withdrawn. Similarly on the Speaker's suggestion a member who had been directed to withdraw during the consideration of a letter written by him reflecting on the Speaker's conduct has been recalled to afford him an opportunity of making an apology to the house after his letter has been resolved to be a breach of

privilege.3 Petitions on the 17th May, 1849, petitions were presented comcomplain.

· plainingof the conduct of three members, as railway directors.

The members were permitted to explain and defend their
conduct, but did not afterwards withdraw. It being contrary
to the standing orders (see p. 532) to make a motion or to
enter upon a debate on the presentation of a petition, unless
it complains of some present personal grievance or relates to
a matter of privilege, the conduct of the members could
scarcely be regarded as under the consideration of the house
at that time, and as soon as the members were heard, the
petitions were ordered to lie upon the table, without further
debate. One of the members withdrew, but returned almost

immediately to his seat.
Members in On the 28th April, 1846, the house had resolved that Mr.
P. W. S. O'Brien, a member, had been guilty of a contempt :

but the debate upon the consequent motion for his commit-
ment was adjourned until a future day; upon which Mr.
O'Brien immediately entered the house, and proceeded to
his place. Mr. Speaker, however, acquainted him that it
would be advisable for him to withdraw until after the de-
bate concerning him had been concluded. The reason for
this intimation was that the member had been already

con

| 21st July, 1887, 317 H. D. 3 s. 1633-1638.

? 21st Dec. 1893, 148 C. J. 631. 3 7th July, 1893, 148 ib. 417.

XI.

Chapter declared to be in contempt, although his punishment was

not yet determined upon. On the 30th, a request was made, through a member, that he should be heard in his place: but this was regarded as clearly irregular, and he was not permitted to be heard. But a member not yet adjudged guilty of contempt may return to his place, when debate on his conduct has been adjourned.?

W

1 85 H. D. 3 s, 1198. 1291.
? Mr. Parnell, 25th July, 1877, 235 ib, 1815. 1833.

[merged small][ocr errors]

e also

cannot vote.

gorerns the

287.

DIVISIONS.

Table of Contents,

see IntroMembers In both houses, any member who desires to vote is required duction. not present when ques- to be present in the house when the question is put from the Sce

Appendix chair the first or second time (see, p. 287). If not within vi. the folding-doors of the house when the question is put The roice, from the chair, he is not entitled to vote ; and the follow- rote, see p. ing precedents will explain the various circumstances under

which this rule has been applied.
Precedents. On the 16th March, 1821, Mr. Speaker called the attention

of the house to his having, at the previous sitting, caused
a member to vote in a division who was not within the
doors of the house when the question was put; and the
house resolved, nem. con., “that the said member had no
right to vote, and ought not to have been compelled to vote
on that occasion.” 1

On the 3rd May, 1819, after the numbers had been reported
by the tellers, notice was taken that several members had
come into the house after the question was put. Mr. Speaker
desired any members who were not in the house when the
question was put, to signify the same; and certain members
having stated that they were not in the house, their names
were struck off from the “ayes” and from the “noes”
respectively; and the numbers so altered were reported by
Mr. Speaker to the house.?

On the 14th June, 1836, the house was informed by a member who had voted with the majority on a former day, that he was not in the house when the question was put, and had therefore no right to vote on that occasion; and it was resolved that his vote should be disallowed.

On the 5th July, 1855, the chairman of the committee on the Tenants’ Improvements (Ireland) Bill, on reporting 1 76 C. J. 172.

3 91 ib. 475. ? 74 ib. 393 ; also 80 ib. 483.

Chapter progress, stated that, on a division in committee, when the

numbers were reported at the table by the tellers, his attention
had been called to the fact that three members, who had
voted in the majority, were in the lobby beyond the folding-
doors, at the back of the Speaker's chair, when the question
was put, and asked whether they were entitled to vote. The
Speaker ruled “that to entitle a member to vote he must
have been in the house and within the folding-doors, and
must have heard the question put. After the glass has
been turned, and before the question has been put, the
officers of the house are bound to clear the lobbies of all

members; any member not wishing to leave the house or to See also

vote, is at liberty to retire to the rooms beyond the lobby."
p. 358,
n. 1. Mr. Speaker also stated, in reply to a question from the

chairman, “ that the vote of any member not present when
the question is put, may be challenged before the numbers
are declared, or after the division is over.” 1

In accordance with this rule, members who were in the
rooms behind the chair or iu one of the side lobbies when
the question was put, have been informed by the Speaker
or the chairman, that they were not entitled to give their

vote. Time, &c., These precedents show that at whatever time it may be of dealing

discovered that members were not present when the ques

etion was put, whether during the division, before the p. 363.

numbers are reported, or after they are declared, or even
at a subsequent sitting, such votes are disallowed. And
in the Lords, a similar rule prevails.
It was formerly customary, before a division took place Strangers

withdraw.
in either house, to enforce the entire exclusion of strangers :
but in the Commons, pursuant to resolution 28th July,
1853, and to standing order No. 90, strangers have only $. 0.90,

Appendix I. been required to withdraw from below the bar ;4 and in the Lords, under resolution 10th March, 1857, and standing

+

error in d division, see

1 110 C. J. 352; 139 H. D. 3 s. 486.

2 111 O. J. 47; 141 ib. 242 ; 142 ib. 186.

3 65 L. J. 481 (Local Jurisdiction Bill, 1833) ; 179 H. D. 3 s. 739.

"The direction given by standing order No. 90, for the withdrawal of strangers from the front gallery, is not enforced.

XIII.

to a division.

order No. 32, strangers have not been required to with. Chapter
draw from the galleries and the space within the rails of
the throne. In fact, they withdraw from those parts of
the house only in which, if they remained, they would

interfere with the division." Proceed- The Speaker, directly the debate is closed, puts the Division ings prior

challenged, question, and when the voices are taken, gives the order see p. 287. that "strangers must withdraw." One of the clerks at the

table then turns a two-minute sand-glass, pursuant to stand8. 0.28, ing order No. 28, and, while the sand is running, the doorAppendix I.

keepers set in motion the “division bells” in every part of
the building, to give notice that a division is at hand. When

the sand has run out, the Speaker, pursuant to standing 8. O. 29, order No. 29, so soon as he shall think proper to direct Appendixl.

that the doors be closed, cries, “order, order," and imme-
diately the Serjeant, and the doorkeepers and messengers
under his orders, close and lock all the doors leading into
the house and the adjoining lobbies, simultaneously. Those
members who arrive after the doors are shut cannot gain
admittance, and those who are within cannot leave the
house until after the question has been put the second

time and the division has commenced.? Question When the doors are closed, the Speaker again puts the Divisions twice put.

frivolously question, and the ayes and noes respectively declare them- claimed, S. 0.28,, selves. By standing order No. 28, the Speaker is obliged se Appendix).

to put the question twice, because the sand-glass is not
turned until the voices have been taken; and in the mean
time, members who were not present when the question was
put, gain admittance to the house. None of these could For prac-

tice regardvote unless the question were again put; and therefore the ing di question is put a second time after the doors are closed, in vis

"moment for order that the whole house, having had notice of a division, interrup

tion of busic may be able to decide upon the question when put by the ness, see p.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

s at

221,

1 In the Irish Parliament, stran gers were permitted to be present during a division; see 1 Sir J. Barrington, Personal Sketches, 195.

? On the 16th June, 1857, a peer remained in one of the division

lobbies until after the doors had been locked; and the Serjeant was directed to let him out, without making any report; see also 1 Lord Colchester's Diary, 519.

« 이전계속 »