HC Deb 05 May 1882 vol 269 cc242-6
MR. SPEAKER

I have to report to the House that the Sergeant at Arms attending this House has a communication to make to the House.

Whereupon The SERGEANT came to the Bar, and said: Sir, I have to inform the House that Mr. Erskine, Deputy Sergeant at Arms, has received a copy of a Writ of Summons in an action brought against him by Mr. Bradlaugh, Member for Northampton, for an assault in removing him from the precincts of the House, on the 3rd of August 1881.

MR. SPEAKER

Bring it up.

Then The SERGEANT delivered in the copy of the Writ, and other documents relating thereto, which were read at the Table, as follows:—

10 and 11, Ely Place, Holborn, London, E.C.

25th April 1882.

To Henry D. Erskine, Esqre.

Deputy Sergeant at Arms,

House of Commons.

Sir,—Mr. Bradlaugh is advised that, with a view of testing the legality of your action on the 3rd of August 1881, in preventing him from entering the House of Commons, of which he was then, and is now, a Member, and in removing him from the precincts of the House, and by force placing him in Palace Yard, and preventing him from re-entering Westminster Hall, to commence an action against you for the assault in question.

We need hardly assure you that it is Mr. Bradlaugh's desire, as well as our own, remembering your position as Deputy Sergeant at Arms, to treat you with every consideration; and if, through the Law Officers of the Crown, you can propose any other mode of obtaining a legal determination of the matter than by the commencement of an Action, we shall most readily fall in with any such suggestion.

With a view therefore of enabling you to consider the matter, we have taken no action in the first instance, and we shall be obliged, after you have had an opportunity of conferring with the Law Officers of the Crown on the subject, if you will kindly inform us the determination at which you have arrived.

We are, Sir,

Your obedient Servants,

LEWIS and LEWIS.

April 25th 1882.

Sirs,—I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated this day, and have to inform you that it must be left to Mr. Bradlangh to take such course in the matter you refer to as he may think proper.

I am, Sirs,

Your obedient Servant,

H. D. ERSKINE.

Messrs. Lewis and Lewis,

Ely Place, Holborn.

10 and 11, Ely Place, Holborn, London, E.C.

26th April 1882.

Sir,—We have to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 25th inst. and shall feel obliged by your kindly referring us to your solicitors.

We are, Sir,

Your obedient Servants,

LEWIS and LEWIS.

H. D. Erskine, Esq.

Sergeant at Arms' Room,

House of Commons, Westminster.

28th April 1882.

Sirs,—I beg to inform you that I have no reply to make to your letter of the 26th inst. beyond this acknowledgment of its receipt.

I am, Sirs,

Your obedient Servant,

H. D. ERSKINE.

Messrs. Lewis and Lewis,

Ely Place, Holborn.

10 and 11, Ely Place, Holborn, London, E.C.

3rd May 1882.

To H. D. Erskine, Esq.,

Sergeant at Arms' Room,

House of Commons.

Mr. Bradlaugh, M.P. v. Yourself.

Sir,—We have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 25th ult., and venture to express our regret that you have not referred us to your Solicitors to accept service of process on your behalf.

With a view, however, of avoiding the unpleasantness of personal service on yourself of the process of the Court, we beg to enclose a copy of the Writ in the action, and should you desire to Bee the original, the bearer will be pleased to produce it to you. We trust that you will now place us in communication with your Solicitors so that it may be unnecessary on our part in the future to address you personally on the subject.

For your information we may state that some two years since, we were instructed by an influential body to represent Mr. Bradlaugh as his Solicitors in reference to the Constitutional questions arising on his claim to take his seat as Member of Parliament for the Borough of Northampton, and have continuously acted as his Solicitors in the various proceedings arising out of his Elections.

Much as Mr. Bradlaugh regrets, personally, the necessity of instituting proceedings against you, he is advised that with a view of raising certain legal questions there is no other alternative open to him.

We have the honour to be, Sir,

Yours obediently,

LEWIS and LEWIS.

1882. B. No. 2,487.

In the High Court of Justice.

Queen's Bench Division.

(Writ of Summons.)

Between Charles Bradlaugh, Plaintiff, and Henry D. Erskine, Defendant.

Victoria, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Queen, Defender of the Faith, to Henry D. Erskine, of Westminster, in the county of Middlesex. We command you, that within eight days after the service of this Writ on you, inclusive of the day of such service, you cause an appearance to be entered for you in an Action at the suit of Charles Bradlaugh; and take notice, that, in default of your so doing, the Plaintiff may proceed therein, and Judgment may be given in your absence.

Witness, Roundell Baron Selborne, Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, the third day of May, in the year of Our Lord one thousand eight hundred and eighty-two.

N.B.—This Writ is to be served within twelve calendar months from the date thereof, or, if renewed, within six calendar months from the date of the last renewal, including the day of such date, and not afterwards.

Appearance is to be entered at the Central Office, the Royal Courts of Justice, London.

The Plaintiff's claim is for damages for assault.

This Writ was issued by Messrs. Lewis and Lewis, of No. 10, Ely Place, Holborn, in the county of Middlesex, Solicitors for the said Plaintiff, who resides at 20, Circus Road, Saint John's Wood, in the county of Middlesex.

The address for service is 10, Ely Place, Holborn, London, aforesaid.

This Writ was served by me at

on the Defendant

on the day of 188.

Indorsed the day of 188.

Indorsed Bradlaugh v. Erskine.

Copy Writ of Summons.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Communication now made to the House be taken into Consideration upon Monday next."—(Mr. Attorney General.)

Amendment proposed, at the end of the Question, to leave out the words "upon Monday next," in order to add the words "upon this day six months."—(Mr. Healy.)

Question proposed, "That the words 'upon Monday next,' stand part of the Question."

SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFF

I wish, Sir, to ask, if the Government has not placed Monday at the disposal of my right hon. Friend the Member for East Gloucestershire (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach)? Is this Obstruction on the part of the Government? I do not support the proposition of the hon. Member for Wexford (Mr. Healy); but I must say that I think it a most monstrous thing that the Government should try to take away the only night that they have seen their way to place at the disposal of my right hon. Friend for an important discussion.

MR. GLADSTONE

said, the hon. Gentleman the Member for Portsmouth did not seem thoroughly cognizant of the elementary rights and powers of the House. He seemed to forget that there were certain questions relating to the proceedings of the House, and the proceedings of its agents, which of absolute necessity took precedence of other matters, however pressing. Such a question was before them now; and, as regarded it, he (Mr. Gladstone) would at once say that his line and that of his Friends near him on that subject had been always the same. They had steadily declined to be parties to forward the Resolutions of the House on that subject to which they had thought it their duty to give a respectful obedience; but with regard to defending the servants of the House—the Executive of the House—in respect of the consequences of acts done on behalf of the House, in pursuance of their duties, they were ready to vie with any hon. Gentleman on that side of the House. It was more disagreeable to him than to the hon. Gentleman that there should be this intervention; but his belief and hope was that that question, when considered, would be found to be a question in which the proceeding before them was perfectly straightforward, and need not be the subject of debate.

SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE

I am convinced we have no option but to take this communication into consideration on Monday. It would be unseemly to do so at this moment, and the course proposed is strictly in accordance with precedent.

SIR WILFRID LAWSON

May I ask why this matter should not be taken into consideration at a Morning Sitting to-morrow?

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Original Question put, and agreed to.

Communication to be taken into Consideration upon Monday next.