« 이전계속 »
Chapter Parliamentary Elections Redistribution Bill, 1885, which
enacted that the receipt of medical poor law relief should
not disqualify a voter, the Commons agreed to that amendment, and passed a bill which effected the object of that provision.1 In session 1899 the second reading of the Seats for Shop Assistants (Scotland) Bill, which had passed the Commons, was put off for sis months by the Lords. A similar bill for England and Ireland was passed by the Commons, and sent to the Lords, by whom it was extended to Scotland by means of an amendment, to which the Commons agreed.2 The Zordt' A method of procedure, moreover, has been adopted, Lords'
with the sanction of both houses, by which these rules are ^^Seted. ^574" partially disregarded. When the Lords, out of regard for the privileges of the Commons, defer the consideration of the amendments made by the committee on a bill received from the Commons, for a period beyond the probable duration of the session, if such amendments be otherwise acceptable, the Commons appoint a committee to inspect the Lords' Journals; and, on receiving their report, which explains the position of the bill in the Lords, order another bill to be brought in. This bill often has precisely the same title, but its provisions are so far altered as to conform to the amendments made in the Lords. With these alterations, it is returned to the Lords, received by them without any objection, and passed as if it were an original bilL Such a bill is not identically the same as that which preceded it: but it is impossible to deny that it is " of the same argument and matter," and " of the same substance." This proceeding can be resorted to when the Lords pass Bills laid a bill and send it down to the Commons, with clausesa8ldethat trench upon their privileges. The Commons can lay the bill aside, and order another, precisely similar, to be brought in, which, in due course, is sent up to the Lords.
A proceeding somewhat similar may arise, when a bill
1 The Medical Relief Disqualifi- 317; 298 H. D. 3 3. 1590. cation Removal Bill, 1885, 140 C. J. '154 C. J. 386.
is returned from the Lords to the Commons, with amend- Chapter
ments which the Commons cannot, consistently with their
own privileges, entertain. In that case, if the Commons be willing to adopt the amendments, they can order the bill to be laid aside, and another to be brought in.1 Lords If a bill has been postponed or laid aside in the House Commons* of Commons, the Lords have sometimes appointed a TOtes- committee to search the Votes and Proceedings of the Commons, and may, if they think fit, introduce another bill, and send it to the Commons.8 Proroga- But in all the preceding cases, the disagreement of the new wiiT two houses is only partial and formal, and there is no difference in regard to the entire bill. If the second or third reading of a bill sent from one house to the other be deferred for three or six months, or if it be rejected, the bill cannot be revived in the same session. Hence, in 1707, Parliament was prorogued for a week, in order to admit the revival of a bill which had been rejected by the Lords;8 and in 1881, Parliament was prorogued from the 20th Eff^t of a October to the 6th December, in order to bring in the third Hon, see Reform BUI.4 p 44
Amending By a rule, annulled by 18 & 14 Vict. c. 21, a second bill,
sion- same session, could not be introduced; and thus, in 1721, a prorogation for two days was resorted to, in order to enable Acts relating to the South Sea Company to be passed, contradictory to clauses contained in another Act of the same session.5
Proposals Proposals have been made for a provision, either by statute Private
for sue %• • bills 3us'
pending or or °7 standing orders, for the suspension of bills, from one }*nded, see rnnming session to another, or for resuming proceedings upon such chap' "1X" bills, notwithstanding a prorogation. These schemes have been discussed in Parliament, and carefully considered by committees: but various considerations have restrained the
1 91 C. J. 777. 810; 100 ib. 664. Coxe's Walpole, 8; 2 Hatsell, 127.
688; 103 ib. 888; 127 ib. 167. ■ 86 0. J. 985.
'75 L. J. £90; 77 ib. 505. s 19 ib. 639.
legislature from disturbing the constitutional law by which parliamentary proceedings are discontinued by a prorogation.1
1 Earl of Derby's Parliamentary Proceedings Adjournment Bill, 1848, 98 H. D. 8 s. 829. 981.1255; 99 ib. 246; 100 ib. 131; Report of Commons' Committee on Publio Business, 1848; Report on Lords' Committee on Public Business, 1861; Report of Commons' Committee on Business of the House, 1861; Marquess of Salisbury's Parliamentary Proceedings BUI, 1869, 194 H. D. 3 s. 588; again, 7th May, 1883, 279 ib. 2; Report of Joint Committee on Despatch of Business in Parliament,
1869; Reports of Commons' Committees on Publio Business, 1878, and on abridged procedure in 1890 [No. 298]. In session 1903, provision was made for resuming the proceedings on the Port of London Bill as reported from the Joint Committee, in the following session. A resolution for the resumption of proceedings on the bill was agreed to in the following session, but further progress was not made with the bill, 159 C. J. 181.
RULES OF DEBATE.
Manner of In the House of Lords, pursuant to standing order No. 25, a peer addresses his speech "to the rest of the lords in general." In the Commons, a member addresses the Speaker; and it is irregular for him to direct his speech to the house, or to any party on either side of the house. A member is not permitted to read his speech, but may refresh his memory by a reference to notes. The reading of written speeches, which has been allowed in other deliberative assemblies, has never been recognized in either house of Parliament. A member may read extracts from documents, but his own language must be delivered bond fide, in the form of an unwritten composition. Any other rule would be at once inconvenient and repugnant to the true theory of debate.1 A member must address the house in English.3
In both houses every member who speaks, rises in his place, and stands uncovered. The only exception to the rule is in cases of sickness or infirmity, when the indulgence of a seat is allowed, at the suggestion of a member, and with the general acquiescence of the house.8 The only occasion, in both houses, when a member speaks sitting and covered is a question of order which has arisen
Table of Content!, see Introduction.
1 1 C. J. 272. 494; 7 H. D. 208; 88 ib. 3 B. 1169. 1281; 122 Pari. Deb. 4 s. 554; see also Lord Colchester's Diary, ii. 60. 482 j 223 H. D. 3 s. 178; 235 ib. 773. Although on one occasion, during the debate on the Household Franchise Bill, 1873, a letter from Mr. Gladstone was read to the house, containing statements regarding the bill under discussion (217 H. D. 3 s. 842-844), when it was proposed, in like manner, to use in debate a letter from Mr. Gladstone touching the
Customs and Inland Revenue (No.
« 89 Pari. Deb. 4 s. -546.
'Lord Wynford, 64 L. J. 167; Mr. Wynn, 67 H. D. 3 s. 658. Questions proposed by the Speaker sitting owing to illness, 121 C. J. 197.
Breach of order during a division, *'e P. 357.
Chapter during a division, when the doors are closed.1 A member xa- may speak from the side galleries, appropriated to members,
but not from below the bar.2 Ovation Debate arises when a question has been proposed by the Time of Speaker, and before it has been fully put. 8peskingcfcrf^ee in the House of Lords, under standing order No. 80, "when a question hath been entirely put by the Speaker, no lord is to speak against the question before voting ;" and a question being entirely put implies that the voices have also been given. In the Commons, no member may speak No member to any question after the same has been fully put by the a°ter*ak Speaker; and a question is fully put when he has taken aJj" p°t the voices both of the ayes and of the noes.8
From the limited authority of the Speaker of the House who euof Lords, in directing the proceedings of the house, and in speak.1" maintaining order, the right of a peer to address their lordships depends solely upon the will of the house. When two rise at the same time, unless one immediately gives way, the house call upon one of them to speak; and if each be supported by a party, there is no alternative but a division. Thus, on the 3rd February, 1775, the Earl of Dartmouth and the Marquis of Rockingham both rising to speak, it was resolved, upon question, that the former "shall now be heard."1 If the lord chancellor rises from the woolsack to address the house, it is customary to give him precedence over other peers who may rise at the same time.5
For the In the Commons, when two or more members rise to The
speak, the Speaker calls on the member who, on rising in ^\\kei'
to move > 20th April, 1883, 278 H. D. 3 s. after he had fully put the question, am*nd- 854; 2nd Sept. 1886, 308 ib. 1165; saying that he thought the " noes" inenfs, see nh Jun(J) lg04j 135 Parl Deb 4 ^ had H g Lord Colchester's Diary,
P' 1024. 74; 2 HatseU, 102, n.
1 246 H. D. 3 s. 1363. Speaking * 34 L. J. 306; see also 18 H. D.
from the galleries is inconvenient, 719, n.; proceedings on motion that
and rarely resorted to. the Earl Cairns be heard, 11th June,
* 12th May, 1606," Any man may 1884, 116 L. J. 325.