Tellers' mistakes. Members in the wrong lobby. XIII. error in lists, see p. Speaker, who declares the numbers, and states the determi- Chapter Members occasionally remain in a division lobby un- The tumult in committee, 10th May, 1675 (see p. 387), arose from a difference among the tellers. On the 27th February, 1771, a stranger having been told among the "noes," a second division took place, 2 Cav. Debates, 332, 335. On the 30th March, 1810, a second division was taken on the Expedition to the Scheldt, 65 C. J. 235; and again on the 26th June, 1860, in committee on the Tenure and Improvement of Land (Ireland) Bill, 115 ib. 332. In this case a question was raised privately, whether a member, who had voted with the ayes in the first division, could afterwards vote with the noes: but it was held that, as the first division had become null and void, the house could only deal with the member's 4 heard the question put, goes Contrary practice in committee, see p. 412. voice and vote in the last and valid u select 2 19th Feb. 1847, 102 ib. 131; 2nd 3 123 ib. 16; 128 ib. 223. 4 67 Parl. Deb. 4 s. 1200. Both the tellers in the lobby through which the member has passed must agree that he should be counted, 98 ib. 1189. XIII. Chapter into the wrong lobby, through inadvertence, it is the rule in the Commons, in opposition to the practice of the Lords (see p. 359), to hold the member bound by the vote he has actually given, without regard to his voice on the question, or his own declared intention. On the 9th April, 1856, "one of the tellers for the noes stated that Mr. Wykeham Martin was with the noes, in the left lobby, but had refused to vote with them "-the fact being that he had gone into that lobby by mistake. As he had heard the question put, he was informed that, having gone forth into the left lobby, his vote must be recorded with the noes.2 Again, on the 21st June, 1864, Sir C. O'Loghlen, in committee on the Court of Chancery (Ireland) Bill, went into the wrong lobby, and carried, by his vote, the question that the chairman do leave the chair. He stated his case to the Speaker, when the house was resumed, but was told that, having heard the question put, there was no remedy for his error.8 Objection to vote on the ground of personal interest, see p. 373. manner of As has been mentioned (see p. 288), the objection that a Time and the chair; and this rule is enforced regarding a demand to The objection that a member whose vote had been taken 1 Members who find themselves in the doors unlocked, in order that lobby, if the claim be made before 2111 C. J. 129. 3 176 H. D. 3 s. 31. For similar See also 13th June, 1906, 158 with errors in a 5 245 H. D. 3 s. 919; 11th March, 1885, 140 C. J. 93; 19 Parl. Deb. 4 s. 409. On the 7th May, 1895, two members complained immediately after the declaration of the numbers in a division from the chair that the tellers had left the door of the "aye" lobby before they had reached it. The chairman directed the tellers of that lobby to come to the table, and having heard their explanation directed the clerk to alter the numbers by adding the names of the two members to the ayes, and then again declared the numbers as so corrected, 33 ib. 658. Casting Speaker. XIII. in a division was not within the folding-doors of the house Chapter An error in the report of the numbers taken at a division If the numbers in a division are equal, the Speaker (and voice of the in committee the chairman, see p. 382), who otherwise never votes, must give the casting voice. In the performance of this duty, he is at liberty to vote like any other member, according to his conscience, without assigning a reason2 but, in order to avoid the least imputation upon his impartiality, it is usual for him, when practicable, to vote in such a manner as not to make the decision of the house final, and to explain his reasons, which are entered on the journal. Precedents. The principle which guides a Speaker in giving his casting vote was thus explained by Mr. Speaker Addington. On the third reading of the Succession Duty on Real Estates Bill, there having been a majority against "now" reading the bill a third time, and also against reading it that day three months, there was an equality of votes on a 1102 C. J. 131. 2 93 ib. 537. 393 ib. 587; 95 ib. 536; 98 ib. 163; 102 ib. 872; 106 ib. 205; 317 XIII. Chapter third question, that the bill be read a third time to-morrow, when the Speaker gave his casting vote with the ayes, saying "that upon all occasions when the question was for or against giving to any measure a further opportunity of discussion, he should always vote for the further discussion, more especially when it had advanced so far as a third reading; and that when the question turned upon the measure itself-for instance, that a bill do or do not passhe should then vote for or against it, according to his best judgment of its merits, assigning the reasons on which such judgment would be founded." 1 Present form of previous question, see p. 283. On the 24th February, 1797, Mr. Speaker Addington gave his casting vote in favour of going into committee on the Quakers Bill, assigning as his reason that he had prescribed to himself an invariable rule of voting for the further discussion of any measure which the house had previously sanctioned, as in this instance it had, by having voted for the second reading: but that upon any question which was to be governed by its merits, as, for instance, "That this bill do pass," he should always give his vote according to his judgment, and state the grounds of it.2 voice sub matter to The course adopted by successive Speakers, in giving Casting, their casting vote, can be traced in the following examples, mitting a first, of the casting vote given so as to afford the house an the further opportunity for a further decision; and secondly, of the decision of casting vote which decided the matter before the house, given upon the judgment which the Speaker formed upon the occasion which required his vote. * (1) In the proceedings taken against Lord Melville, 8th April, 1805, which resulted in his impeachment, the numbers were equal upon the previous question (moved in the form, "That the question be now put ")—that question being the motion on which Lord Melville's impeachment was based-Mr. Speaker Abbot gave his casting vote in favour of the previous question, on the ground that "the 12th May, 1792, 1 Lord Col- Lord Colchester's Diary, 85; 52 C. the house. Casting voice which original question was now fit to be submitted to the Chapter judgment of the house."1 (2) On the 10th May, 1860, the numbers being equal upon an amendment to a bill, on report, the Speaker stated that as the house was unable to form a judgment upon the propriety of the proposed amendment, he should best perform his duty by leaving the bill in the form in which the committee had reported it to the house.2 A similar course has generally been taken on stages in the progress of bills -often without stating any reasons.3 (3) On the third reading of the Tests Abolition (Oxford) Bill, 1st July, 1864, an adverse amendment having been negatived by a majority of ten, a debate was raised upon the main question that the bill be now read a third time, during which many members came into the house; and upon the division the numbers were equal. Under these circumstances, the Speaker said he should afford the house another opportunity of deciding upon the merits of the bill, by declaring himself with the ayes, and the question that the bill do pass was negatived by a majority of two.* (4) On the 3rd April, 1905, the numbers being equal upon an instruction to the committee on the London County Council (Tramways) Bill to omit certain tramways, the Speaker stated that in order that the matter might be considered by the committee and that the house might have a further opportunity of coming to a more decisive conclusion, he gave his voice with the noes.5 (1) On a question for the appointment of a committee to inquire into delays in the Court of Chancery, 5th June, 1811, the Speaker voted with the ayes, it being upon a question before the "whether or not this house shall exercise its own power of decided a matter house. inquiry into the causes of existing grievances." 6 (2) On the 26th May, 1826, the Speaker, the numbers being XIII. |
