페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

assess

Chapter alter or otherwise affect any valuation or assessment of

“_ taxation." Part II. Even when amendments by the Lords are an infringement Amend

ments inof privilege, it is not the invariable practice of the Commons fringing to assert their claim regarding amendments made to bills Privilege. that they have sent to the Lords, which dealt with the relief of the poor, or with municipal, county, and local rates and assessments; more especially when those amendments affected charges upon the people incidentally only, and were made for the purpose of giving effect to the legislative intentions of the Commons. The difficulty also of separating those amendments from other legislative provisions or amendments, to which there was no objection, has frequently prompted their acceptance by the Commons.3

Nor have the Commons, in dealing with amendments by the Lords to bills for the administration of local and other rates and charges, which touched matters of privilege, refrained from acting on the principle that, if the Lords' amendments, both in object and intention, dealt with legislative and not fiscal objects, a rigid adherence on the part of the Commons to their privileges might exclude the Lords from the practical consideration of such bills. On an occasion of this nature, in the session of 1838, when the Commons had before them Lords' amendments, many of which dealt with privileged matters, Speaker Abercromby explained the course which in his judgment should be

1 79 C. J. 524 ; 80 ib. 579. 631; 81 ib. 388; 86 ib. 684; 90 ib. 375; 91 ib. 823; 92 ib. 659; 107 ib. 236; 112 ib. 389. 418; 116 ib. 205; 120 ib. 449; 122 ib. 426. 456; 123 ib. 345. 362; 131 ib. 412; 135 ib. 196. 369; 136 ib. 453; 137 ib. 389; 145 ib. 570. 575; 146 ib. 169. 428. 491. 503; 147 ib. 404; 149 ib. 384. 393; 151 ib. 383; 153 ib. 406; 157 ib. 524; 158 ib. 419. 424.

? Prisoners' Removal Bill, 1849, the Lords made the bill perpetual, instead of being in force for three years. In the Industrial Schools Bill, 1961, the Lords struck out a

limitation of the Act, and thereby extended the charge: the Commons agreed to the amendment.

3 Municipal Corporations Bill, 1837, 92 C. J. 465; Irish Poor Relief Bill, 1838, 44 H. D. 3 s. 575; 93 C. J.744; Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Bill, 1838, 44 H. D. 3 s. 871; Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill, 1847, 92 H. D. 3 s. 1299; 102 C. J. 593; Landed Property(Ireland) Bill, 1847, 120 ib. 594 ; Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill, 27th July, 1849, 107 H. D. 3 s. 1039; Poor Law Loans Bill, 1871 (special entry); Poor Law Act Amendment Bills, 1876, 1878, &c.

XXII.

followed. Speaking as the authorized guardian of the Chapter privileges of the house, he remarked, after reference to a precedent which had occurred in the year 1834, that the Part II. bill affected “not only the proprietors of the land, but the great mass of the people of Ireland ;” and that, “as the principle of rating was necessarily incidental to such a measure, he considered that, if the privileges of this house were strictly pressed in such a case, they would almost tend to prevent the House of Peers from taking such a measure into its consideration in a way that might be, on all grounds, advisable."

Influenced by these considerations, as appears by the debates which took place on three occasions, in the years 1838, 1847, and 1849, with the expressed sanction, not only of Mr. Abercromby, but of Mr. Shaw Lefevre, the Commons waived the exercise of their privilege, and considered amendments made by the Lords, which, not only by the omission of provisions, but by distinct enactment, changed the area, and therefore the burthen, of local taxation, and imposed rates higher than the rates fixed by the House of Commons.' And, though the Commons disagreed to certain amendments, which proposed to apply loans drawn from the Consolidated Fund to objects other than those prescribed by the Commons, and to extend the time appointed for the application of the loans, their disagreement was not based on a claim of privilege. In like manner, although it is not competent for the Lords, by a private bill, to alter rates leviable under a public Act, the Speaker suggested that a Lords' amendment to that effect, and therefore an amendment which affected the privileges of the Commons, should be accepted, with a special entry upon the journal to justify and explain the course adopted by the house.3

1 24th July, 1838, 44 H. D. 3 s. 575; 92 ib. 1299, 1306. 1341; 107 ib. 1039. See also the Speaker's rulings on Lords' Amendments to the Housing of the Working Classes and Local Government (Ireland) Bills, 1900, 87 Parl. Deb, 4 s. 808.

954. 956.

• Landed Property (Ireland) Bill, 1847, 102 C. J. 594. 606; 92 H. D. 3 s. 1299, 1340.

3 Dublin Corporation Bill, 1890, 348 ib. 964.

Lords' amend.

p. 505.

Chapter Rejection of privileged amendments.—When the Lords’

amendments necessitate an assertion of the Commons' Part II. privileges, the disagreement is made on the ground of

privilege ; and in the message to the Lords from the Bill pro Commons, communicating the reasons for their disagreecedure,

ment, the assertion of this claim usually takes the form of

a statement that the amendments would interfere with the ments, see

public revenue, or affect the levy and application of rates,
or alter the area of taxation, or otherwise infringe the
privileges of the house, and that the Commons consider
that it is unnecessary on their part to offer any further
reason, hoping the above reason may be deemed sufficient.
This hint of privilege is generally accepted by the Lords,
and the amendment is not insisted upon. Though, on a
recent occasion, when the rejection by the Commons of an
amendment, because, as stated in their reasons, the
amendment would create “a further charge upon the
revenue,” was accepted by the Lords, that house asserted,
by a resolution, that they made no admission in respect of
any deduction which might be drawn from the reasons
offered by the Commons, and did not consent that these

reasons should thereafter be drawn into a precedent.? Procedure If the Lords return a message to the Commons insisting Final dison Lords' amend." upon a privileged amendment, the course adopted by the is ments, see

Commons is to order that the Lords' amendments be laid amendp. 508.

aside, or that the consideration of the amendments be
deferred for six months.

Relaxation of Commons' privileges.—The claim to ex- Pecuniary
clusive legislation over charges imposed upon the people bed fees:
was formerly extended by the Commons to the imposition
of fees and pecuniary penalties, and to provisions which

ment Lords'

ments.

· Naval Prize Balance Bill, 1850, 105 C. J. 491 ; Tramways (Ireland) Bill, 1860; Juries Bill, 1862; Peace Preservation (Ireland) Bill, 1870, 125 ib. 123; Intoxicating Liquors Licences Suspension Bill, 1871, 126 ib. 432; 208 H. D. 3 s. 1736; Erne Loch and River Bill, 1881, 136 C.J. 474; Elementary Education Bill,

1891, 146 ib. 507; Local Government (England and Wales) Bill, 1893-4, 148 ib. 677; Local Government (Ireland) Bill, 1898, 153 ib. 408; Licensing Bill, 1904, 159 ib. 417.

: 356 H. D. 3 s. 122; Elementary Education Bill, 1891, 123 L. J. 425.

in the nature a tax.

touched the mode of suing for fees and penalties,' and Chapter
to their application when recovered; and they denied to the
Lords the power of dealing with these matters. The rigid Part II.

enforcement of this claim proved inconvenient; and in 8. 0. 44, 1849, the Commons adopted a standing order, based on a Appendix I.

resolution passed in 1831, which gave the Lords power
to deal, by bill or amendment, with pecuniary penalties,
forfeitures, or fees, when the object of their legislation was
to secure the execution of an Act; provided that the fees
were not payable into the exchequer, or in aid of the public

revenue; and when the bill shall be a private bill for a 8. O. (Pri- local or personal act. And the Commons also agreed to Peers con

cerned in No. 226. another standing order, whereby they surrendered their the Tolls and privileges so far as they affected private and provisional a charge, charges not

1 order bills sent down from the House of Lords, which refer

to tolls and charges for services performed, not being in
the nature of a tax, or which refer to rates assessed and
levied by local authorities for local purposes.

The practical result of these standing orders is a waiver
by the Commons of their privilege with respect to pecuniary
penalties in public and in private bills.8 Fees imposed in
a public bill can only be dealt with by the Lords provided
they are not paid into the exchequer; whilst it is com-
petent for the Lords by a private bill to impose fees and Private
tolls for rendered services, and to authorize the levy of cedure, see

bill prorates to be assessed and levied by local authorities for local p. 708.

purposes. Breach of Legislation by the Lords regarding charges.—The following privilege avoided by expedients have been adopted, when it is desirable that a underlined hiu

and bill containing provisions which deal with charges upon provisions. the people should be introduced into the House of Lords.

In such a case, the bill is presented and printed, contain-
ing the necessary provisions for giving full effect to the
intention of the bill, and is considered and discussed in the
Lords in that form. On the third reading the provisions

clauses a

1 8th March, 1692, 10 C. J. 845; 3 Hatsell, 126. 135.

2 86 C. J. 477.

3 Court of Chancery (Duchy of Lancaster) Bill, 1850; Burial Ser. vice Bill, 1846 (burial fees).

Part II.

Chapter infringing upon the privileges of the Commons are struck

out; and the bill, drawn so as to be intelligible after their
omission, is sent to the Commons in that form. The bill is
printed by the Commons containing the omitted provisions,
formerly printed in red ink, but now marked by underlines
and brackets, and with a note stating that these provisions
are to be proposed in committee. Thus, as these pro-
visions form no part of the bill received from the House of
Lords, no privilege is violated; whilst the bill before the
Commons contains every provision necessary for giving it
full effect; and in committee the privileged provisions, if
approved of, are inserted."
Occasionally, the same purpose is met by the form in Breach of

... privilege
which the bill, or the amendments are drafted. For in-
stance, when the Lords, by an amendment, extended the

had the the form of Contagious Diseases Prevention Bill, 1846, to Scotland of the

amendand Ireland, as the bill contained rating clauses, they ments. inserted a clause providing that the rating power conferred by the bill should not be thereby extended. To this clause the Commons disagreed; the Lords did not insist thereon, and thus the whole bill was extended to Scotland and Ireland. A bill to continue the Crime and Outrage (Ireland) Act, 1854, was introduced in the Lords, but as the Act contained sections which authorized charges upon the county cess and the Consolidated Fund, a clause was inserted which excepted those sections from the operation of the bill; this exception was disagreed to by the Commons, and thus the entire Act was continued. Again, as the

i Good examples of this practice are afforded by the Burial Grounds Bill, in 1853; the Police (Scotland) Bill, in 1857; the Probates, &c., Act Amendment Bill, in 1858; the Cay. man Islands Government Bill, 1863; British North America Bill, 1867; and Supreme Court of Judicature Bill, 1873. A poor law administration bill, a class of bill formerly not accepted by the Commons from the Lords, was, by the adoption of this method, received and considered by

the Commons. Poor Relief Bill, 1868, 123 O. J. 262.

? 101 ib. 1290. See also debate on Lords' amendments to the Local Government (Ireland) Bill, 1898, and the Education Bill, 1902, 63 Parl. Deb. 4 s. 1029 ; 116 ib. 1383.

3 The Commons, in the session of 1868, refused to strike out a formal provision introduced by the Lords into the West Indies Bill for the purpose of its omission by the Commons,

« 이전계속 »