ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

XII.

Chapter for the adjournment of the house, when there is no question under discussion, must be clearly distinguished from similar motions during a debate. The former can have no object but the discussion of some extraneous subject; the latter has reference only to the adjournment of the question then before the house. The discussion of the former is governed, however, by the established rules of debate, and accordingly on a motion for the adjournment of the house moved because the business of supply had been concluded on an allotted day before the hour at which any other business could be taken (see p. 259), the Speaker has refused to allow a member to discuss the details of a bill standing on the notice paper for that sitting,1 while on the motion for the adjournment for the holidays members have been precluded from anticipating the discussion of bills and notices of motions upon the notice paper or order book, or from discussing matters that would entail legislation. It has also been held that a member could not raise on the motion for the adjournment for the holidays a matter that could be properly raised on the report of the vote on account which stood on that day's order paper.5 On the motion for the adjournment from Friday to Monday (see p. 212) it has been ruled that discussion on any matter that was irrelevant to the motion itself was out of order."

Debate on petitions,

see p. 533.

2

on discus

It is not regular to discuss the merits of a bill, or other Restraints order of the day, upon a motion for its withdrawal or post- sion of bills. ponement, and debate must be strictly confined to the object of the motion." Otherwise, the merits of a bill might be debated not only upon its several stages, but whenever its postponement is proposed. And, further, the discussion of each stage might be anticipated, by resuming debates before the day appointed for its consideration by

1 92 Parl. Deb. 4 s. 301.
2 94 ib. 995. 999.

207 H. D. 3 s. 1640; 81 Parl.
Deb. 4 s. 1414. 1419; 94 ib. 1011;
132 ib. 1041; 135 ib. 386. 387; 145
ib. 645; 147 ib. 1028.

71 ib. 1034; 123 ib. 204; 132 ib. 1043; 135 ib. 409.

$ 39 ib. 403.
6116 ib. 1030.

7 215 H. D. 3 s. 304; 226 ib. 860; 337 ib. 1167; 339 ib. 1493. See also the Speaker's remarks in refusing to propose the question for the adjournment of the debate on such a motion, 113 Parl. Deb. 4 s. 341.

When no

house.

XII.

the house.1 On 1st June, 1875, a member having moved Chapter
the postponement of the second reading of a bill, from the
next day until a more distant day, another member rose to
move that the order be discharged: but upon the Speaker
representing the inconvenience and impropriety of such an
amendment, which would raise a debate upon the merits
of the bill, when its postponement only was in question,
the amendment was not proceeded with.2

No member may speak except when there is a question
question is
before the before the house, or the member is about to conclude with
a motion or amendment. These are the only exceptions
which are admitted: questions put before the commence-
ment of public business to ministers or other members of
the house (see p. 246); personal explanations (see p. 319);
and statements made by the ministers of the Crown
regarding public affairs.

Ministerial explanations.

Explanations of this kind are made to the house on behalf of the government, stating the advice they have tendered to the sovereign regarding their retention of office, or the dissolution of Parliament; announcing the legislative proposals they intend to submit to Parliament; or the course they intend to adopt in the transaction and arrangement of public business.

ment of

The time when these explanations are made is after the questions to ministers and to other members have been answered, and before the commencement of public busi- Commenceness; though a ministerial explanation has been made public busibefore the Speaker began to call on members to put their mess, see p. questions upon the notice paper. As no question is before the house, debate on such statements is irregular.5

1 240 H. D. 3 s. 858.

2 224 ib. 1235.

10th June, 1884, 290 ib. 692; 13th June, 1892, 5 Parl. Deb. 4 s. 915; Wednesday, 14th March, 1894, 22 ib. 257; 24th July, 1905, 150 ib. 49.

4 293 H. D. 3 s. 1820; 24th June, 1895, 34 Parl. Deb. 4 s. 1746. Ministerial explanations have also been

made during debate on motions that
afforded an opportunity for the state-
ment. For instance, on motion for
committee of supply, 4th March,
1867; on motion for an adjourn
ment of the house, 5th March, 1867,
185 H. D. 3 s. 1309. 1339.

5 Debate on a ministerial state-
ment has been raised upon a motion
for adjournment, 290 ib. 696.

255.

Chapter
XII.

Explanation

during debate, see p.

320.

nation on

Explanation by a member of the circumstances which Expla have caused his resignation of an office in the government leaving is usually made immediately before the commencement of office. public business.1 Though debate must not arise upon the explanation, statements pertinent thereto on behalf of the government have been permitted.

In regard to the explanation of personal matters, the Personal explahouse is usually indulgent; and will permit a statement of nation. that character to be made without any question being before the house but no debate should ensue thereon. General arguments or observations beyond the fair bounds of explanation, or too distinct a reference to previous debates, are out of order; 2 though a member has been permitted by the Speaker to make, upon a subsequent sitting, an explanation regarding alleged misrepresentation in debate.3 The indulgence of a personal explanation should be granted bates by with caution; for, unless discreetly used, it is apt to lead way of explanation, to irregular debates. In one case personal explanations were permitted to be made by one member, on behalf of another who was abroad.5 Explanations have also been allowed on behalf of gentlemen whose conduct had been reflected upon in debate; though recently an explanation of this nature was not permitted by the Speaker.7

See also reference to prior de

p. 324.

6

1 Lord Henry Lennox, 230 H. D. 3 s. 1481; Mr. W. E. Forster, 269 ib. 106; Mr. Mundella, 24th May, 1894, 24 Parl. Deb. 4 s. 1191; Mr. Hayes Fisher, 7th April, 1903, 120 ib. 1254; Mr. Wyndham, 9th May, 1905, 145 ib. 1352. Explanations of this nature have been made during debate upon a motion to which such statements were relevant; Mr. Courtney, 4th Dec. 1884, 294 H. D. 3 s. 659; Mr. Chamberlain and Sir George Trevelyan, 304 ib. 1104. 1181; Lord George Hamilton, 7th March, 1904, 131 Parl. Deb. 4 s. 417.

2 Lord C. Paget, 14th March, 1864, 173 H. D. 3 s. 1913.

* 87 ib. 480.

'Mr. T. Duncombe, 18th March, 1859, 153 ib. 334; Mr. Sheridan

and the chancellor of the exchequer,
17th March, 1864, 174 ib. 191; Mr.
Lowe, Lord R. Cecil, Mr. Disraeli,
and Mr. Walter, 18th April, 1864,
174 ib. 1203; Mr. Baillie Cochrane,
the chancellor of the exchequer,
and Mr. Roebuck, 28th March, 1865,
178 ib. 372; 269 ib. 106-132. See
also motion to express regret that
imputations made against a member
had not been withdrawn on the
occasion of a personal explanation,
18th March, 1864, 174 ib. 306.

5 Mr. Bright, 16th March, 1860,
for Mr. Cobden, 157 ib. 718.

6 Case of Dr. Beke, 29th Nov. 1867, 190 ib. 422; case of Mr. Reed, 210 ib. 403.

19th May, 1882, 269 H. D. 3 s. 1095.

To speak

XII.

sumed, in

313.

see p. 296.

Except on occasions when a reply is permitted (see Chapter once only. p. 321), or in a committee, it is a rule, strictly observed in both houses, that no member shall speak twice to the Speech resame question, unless he speaks to explain some part of terrupted by adjournhis speech which has been misunderstood. Accordingly, ment, see p. when a member speaks to a motion, and resumes his seat without moving an amendment that he intended to pro- Relaxation of this rule pose, he cannot subsequently rise to move the amendment, (business of having already spoken to the question before the house. the house), So also, if, when an order of the day has been read, a member, having made a prolonged appeal that the consideration of the order should be deferred, resumes his seat, he cannot again address the house thereon. Under special circumstances, on an explanation from the Speaker, the pleasure of the house has been signified that a member should be allowed to speak a second time; and a second speech has been allowed to a minister, who had spoken early in the debate, in answer to a question which had rendered a ministerial explanation necessary, or to answer a question addressed to him after he had spoken.*

To explain.

8

1. The right of an explanation is regulated in the House of Lords by standing order No. 27, which prescribes that no lord is to speak twice to a bill, at one time of reading it, or to any other proposition, except the mover in reply, "unless it be to explain himself in some material part of his speech" (no new matter being introduced), and not without the leave of the house first obtained.

So also in the Commons, a member who, during a debate, has spoken to a question may again be heard to offer explanation of some material part of his speech which has been misunderstood: but he must not introduce new matter, nor endeavour to strengthen by new arguments his former position, which he alleges to have

1191 H. D. 3 s. 1083.

2 Indian Councils Act Amendment Bill, 26th May, 1892, 4 Parl. Deb. 4 s. 1930.

3 Government Annuities Bill, 7th March, 1864 (the chancellor of the exchequer and Mr. H. B. Sheridan),

173 H. D. 3 s. 1549; 103 Parl. Deb.
4 s. 231; 145 Parl. Deb. 4 s. 833.

Lord J. Russell, 3rd Feb. 1852,
119 H. D. 3 s. 88. 153; the attorney-
general, 8th April, 1864, 174 ib.
935.

But

Chapter been misunderstood, or to reply to other members.
XII. here, again, a greater latitude is permitted in cases of
personal explanation, where a member's character or con-
Speaker's
statement, duct has been impugned in debate.2

See

p. 324.

time for

nation.

The proper time for explanation is at the conclusion of Proper the speech which calls for it: but it is a common practice expla for the member desiring to explain, to rise immediately the statement is made to which his explanation is directed, when, if the member in possession of the house gives way and resumes his seat, the explanation is at once received: but if the member who is speaking declines to give way, the explanation cannot then be offered.

2. A reply is only allowed to the peer or member who Reply. has proposed a substantive question to the house; and this privilege is accorded to the mover of a substantive motion for the adjournment of the house. It is not conceded to a member who moves an order of the day, such as a motion that a bill be read a second time; nor an amendment,5 the previous question, an adjournment during a debate, a motion on the consideration of Lords' amendments, nor an instruction to any committee. Under these circumstances, Reserved speech. it is not uncommon for a member to move an order of the day, or second a substantive motion by raising his hat, without rising to address the chair, and to reserve his speech for a later period in the debate. Formerly, a member who had moved an order of the day, or seconded a motion in

1 165 H. D. 3 s. 1032; 167 ib. 1216. Mr. Lowe and Lord R. Cecil, 13th May, 1864, 175 ib. 462; 223 ib. 367. 1009; 226 ib. 525. 567; 231 ib. 301; 241 ib. 332; 242 ib. 1709.

2 15th June, 1846 (Sir R. Peel and Mr. Disraeli), 87 ib. 537.

See explanation of this rule as stated by the Speaker, 24th Nov. 1819, 41 H. D. 157; 27th March, 1860, Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Whiteside, 157 H. D. 3 s. 1407; Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Newdegate, 27th May, 1861, 163 ib. 83; Mr. Denman and the chancellor of the exchequer, 19th May, 1865, 179 ib. 572; Mr. Maguire and Sir R. Peel, 11th May, P.

1866, 183 ib. 800; Mr. Lawson and
Mr. Gathorne Hardy, 22nd May,
1868, 192 ib. 749; 208 ib. 343. 1190;
213 ib. 728.

See 5th Feb. 1858; 4th April,
1859 (ministeral explanations); 11th
April, 1867, 186 ib. 1505; 207 ib.
1350; 210 ib. 1846; 17th Dec. 1878,
&c.

5 174 ib. 2022; 240 ib. 1527.
6 8th Feb. 1858 (Operations in
India, Mr. Disraeli).

186 H. D. 3 s. 1443; Conventual
and Monastic Institutions, 9th May,
1870 (Mr. Matthews); Charing Cross
and Victoria Embankment Bill, 1873
(Lord Elcho).

Y

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »