페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

2

bate.

chair, the question, having been entered on the minutes, is, Chapter
of course, printed in the votes. If the proceeding super-
seded by adjournment be a motion, to bring the matter
again before the house, a notice of the motion must be
renewed (see p. 265); if an order of the day, &c., is so

superseded, the order of the day must be revived (see p. 263). Motions for When a motion for adjournment has been negatived, it Similar adjourning

w motions in the house may not be proposed again without some intermediate co

proceeding; hence arises the practice of moving alternately, see p. 390.
" That this house do now adjourn," and " That the debate
be now adjourned." 2 But a member who has moved the
adjournment of the house is not entitled to move the ad-
journment of the debate, as he has already spoken to the
main question. The latter motion, if carried, merely defers
the decision of the house, while the former, as already ex-
plained, supersedes the question altogether; and therefore
members who only desire to postpone the debate to another
day, should refrain from voting for an adjournment of the
house, as that motion, if carried, would supersede the

question which they may be prepared to support. If, at
Motions the moment for the interruption of business under the
lapse on
interrup. standing orders (see p. 216), a motion for the adjournment

of the house, or of the debate, has been proposed from the

chair, such motion lapses without question put, pursuant S. 0.1, , to the provision in standing order No. 1; and other Appendix I.

restrictions placed upon the use of these motions, for
purposes of obstruction, are treated among the rules of

debate 5 (see p. 316).
Previous 2. The object of the previous question is to withhold from
question.

the decision of the house a motion that has been proposed

tion.

"2 Hatsell, 109, note; 2 Lord Col. chester's Diary, 129.

• Sce proceedings, 23rd Nov. 1819, 41 H. D. 136; Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, 12th May, 1851, 106 C. J. 216; Election Petitions Bill, 29th June, 1857; Night Poaching Prevention Bill, 1st Aug. 1862, 117 ib. 388; Protection of Person and Property (Ireland) Bill, 1881, 136 ib. 49-51, &c.

3 184 H. D. 3 s. 1450.

- An instance of this occurred on the 23rd March, 1848, on a motion relative to the game laws, 97 ib. 963; and again on the 2nd March, 1875, on Mr. Fawcett's motion relating to education in rural districts.

5 See Mr. Speaker's evidence before committees on public business, 1848,1854; and Report of Committee on Public Business, 1858.

Chapter from the chair, by a motion which compels the house to

decide, in the first instance, whether the original motion
shall or shall not be submitted to the vote of the house.
In the Lords, the Lord Speaker puts the question," whether
the original question be now put."1 In the Commons, the
words of this motion are, " That that question be not now
put;" 2 and, if it be resolved in the affirmative, the Speaker
is prevented from putting the original question, as the house
has thus refused to allow it to be put. The original motion
may, however, be brought forward again on another day,
as the decision of the house merely binds the Speaker not
to put the question thereon at that time. If the previous
question be resolved in the negative, the original question
on which it was moved must be put forth with, no amendment,
nor debate, nor motion for adjournment being allowed,
because, as the house has negatived the proposal, “ That
that question be not now put," the question must accordingly
be put at once to the vote.

The previous question has been moved upon the various Previous
stages of a bill,but it cannot be moved upon an amend- Ilaces of ou
ment; 4 though, after an amendment has been agreed to, the bills.
previous question can be put on the main question, as
amended.5 Nor can the previous question be moved upon
a motion relating to the transaction of public business or

1 71 L. J. 581; 74 ib. 87; motion respecting Russia, &c., 28th Jan. 1808, 110 ib. 22. This form of previous question was used by the Commons, 6th Sept. 1641, 2 C. J. 281.

? 146 ib. 96. The Speaker, with the concurrence of the house, first put the previous question in these words, 20th March, 1888, 143 ib. 112, because the motion, " That the question be now put," is akin to the closure motion (see p. 218). The new form of motion also enables the members who support the previous question to vote “ aye," when that question is put from the chair, For illustrations of the former practice, see 2 Hatsell, 122, n.; Lex. Parl.

292; Harbours of Refuge, 19th June, 1860, 115 C. J. 316; 2 Lord Sidmouth's Life, 136; 1 Twiss, Life of Eldon, 232.

31 C. J. 226. 825; 7 ib. 420; 8 ib. 421; 30 ib. 418; 99 ib. 504; 113 ib. 220; 116 ib. 103. 135. 177; 130 ib. 356; 135 ib. 261, &c. + 2 Hatsell, 116.

Previous question moved, after amendments proposed and negatived, 117 C. J. 129; 118 ib. 269. Previous question moved to main question as amended, 94 ib. 496. See also proceedings relative to Kagosima, 119 ib. 45 ; Denmark, ib. 179; 174 H, D. 3 s. 1976; Malt Duty, 120 C. J. 117; 212 H. D, 3 s. 926.

nendments,

the meeting of the house, nor in any committee 2 (see pp. Chapter 385, 394, 420 n.). Nor can the motion for the previous – question be amended.

Previous

question on The motion for the previous question may be superseded matters of

privilege, by a motion for adjournment, and debate thereon may be see p. 275.

adjourned. 3
By amend- 3. The general practice in regard to amendments is ex-

plained on p. 289 : but here such amendments only will be
mentioned as are intended to evade an expression of opinion
upon the main question, by entirely altering its meaning and
object. This is effected by moving the omission of all the
words of the question after the word "that” at the begin-
ning, and by the substitution of other words of a different
import. If this amendment be agreed to by the house, it
is clear that no opinion is expressed directly upon the main
question, because it is determined that the original words
“shall not stand part of the question ; " and the sense of
the house is afterwards taken directly upon the substituted
words, or practically upon a new question. There are
many precedents of this mode of dealing with a question ::
but the best known in parliamentary history are those re-
lating to Mr. Pitt's administration, and the Peace of Amiens,
in 1802. On the 7th May, 1802, a motion was made in the
Commons for an address, “expressing the thanks of this
house to his Majesty for having been pleased to remove the
Right Hon. W. Pitt from his councils ; " upon which an
amendment was proposed and carried, which left out all
the words after the first, and substituted others in direct
opposition to them, by which the whole policy of Mr. Pitt
was commended. Immediately afterwards an address was
moved in both houses of Parliament, condemning the

Treaty of Amiens, in a long statement of facts and argu-
ments; and in each house an amendment was substituted,

Speaker's private ruling, 30th May, 1892.

? The report of the committee on privilege (Mr. Gray), 1882, was recommitted to enforce this rule, 137 C. J. 509.

3 131 C. J. 45, &c.

* 24 ib. 650; 30 ib. 70; 52 ib. 203; 93 ib. 418; Mr. Churchward, 19th March, 1867; employment of Indian Troops in Europe, 1878, 133 ib. 240, &c.

Chapter whereby an address was resolved upon which justified the
IX.

treaty.

This practice has often been objected to as unfair; but the objection is unfounded, as the weaker party must always anticipate defeat, in one form or another. If no amendment be moved, the majority can negative the question itself, and affirm another in opposition to the opinions of the minority. On the very occasion a'ready mentioned, of the 7th May, 1802, after the address of thanks for the removal of Mr. Pitt had been defeated by an amendment, a distinct question was proposed and carried by the victorious party, “ That the Right Hon. W. Pitt has rendered great and important services to his country, and especially deserves the gratitude of this house.” 2 Thus, if no amendment bad been moved, the position of Mr. Pitt's opponents would have been but little improved, as the majority could have affirmed ordenied whatever they pleased. It is in debate alone that a minority can hope to compete with a majority. The forms of the house can ultimately assist neither party: but, so far as they offer any intermediate advantage, the minority have the greatest protection in forms, while the majority are met by obstructions to the exercise of their will.

These are the modes by which a question may be inten- Questions tionally avoided or superseded : but the consideration of a inte

a rupted. question is also liable to casual interruption and postponement from other causes, which are described on p. 269.

The ancient rule that when a complicated question is pro- Compliposed to the house, the house may order such question tions

to be divided, is observed in the following manner. Such ab. When two or more separate propositions are embodied in jection not permissible a motion or in an amendment, the Speaker calls the atten

motions tion of the house to the circumstance; and, if objection be relating to the taken, he puts the question on such propositions separately, brusiness of the house, 268 57 C. J. 419. 450; 36 Parl. Hist. of censure on Earl St. Vincent's

598-654. 686; 3 Stanhope's Pitt, naval administration having been 375-379; 43 L. J. 603.

negatived, and a vote of approbation ? A case precisely similar occurred was immediately moved by Mr. Fox, on the 14th May, 1806, when a yote 7H. D. 208.

ter.

see

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

restricting debate to each proposition in its turn;1 though Coapter
to this course resort is unfrequent, because it is generally -
recognized that, if a motion formed of a series of paragraphs
is submitted to the house, the question should be proposed
on the principal paragraph, which determines the decision
of the house upon the various proposals contained in the
whole motion. If the necessity should arise, separate
subjects contained in a motion can be placed seriatim
before the house by way of amendment.

When debate on a question is closed, the question
must be put, which is done in the following manner. The
Speaker, rising from the chair,: states or reads the
question to the house, beginning with “ The question is,
that." This form of putting the question is always ob- Question

fully put, served, and precedes (or is supposed to precede) every vote sec p. 31 of the house, except in cases where a vote is a formal direction, in virtue of previous orders.

In the Lords, when the question has been put, the Speaker says, “As many as are of that opinion say, * Content,'" and " As many as are of a contrary opinion say, 'Not content;'" and the respective parties exclaim, “ Content,” or “Not content,” according to their opinions. In the Commons, the Speaker takes the sense of the house

1 324 H. D, 3 s. 1828. See also Mr. Speaker's remarks, 17th July, 1905, 149 Parl. Deb, 4 s. 897. For refer. ences to the ancient and obsolete practice by which a complicated question was divided by order of the house, see 2 C. J. 43; 32 ib. 710; 33 ib. 89; 34 ib. 330; 35 ib. 217 (a question divided into five); 17 Hans. Parl. Hist. 429; 2 Hatsell, 118; see also 1 Cavendish Deb. 460-475; 2 Woodfall's Junius, 139; 22 L. J.73; 24 ib. 466. 467 ; 4 Timberland's Debates of the Lords, 392.

? Debate was, on a memorable oc. casion, closed by the action of Mr. Speaker Brand, who, on the morning of Wednesday, 2nd Feb. 1881, when the house had held a continuous sitting from the previous Monday,

put the question on the motion for leave to bring in the Protection of Person and Property (Ireland) Bill, although members were desirous of continuing the debate, 136 C. J. 50.

: On the 9th April, 1866, the Speaker, on returning to the house after an illness, said that he should claim the indulgence of sitting while putting the questions, 121 C. J. 197.

+ "Order, that nothing pass by order of the house without a question, and that no order be without a question, affirmative and negative" (1614), 1 C. J. 464. “Resolved, that when a general vote of the house concurreth in a motion propounded by the Speaker, without any contradiction, there needeth no question " (1621), ib. 650.

« 이전계속 »