§ MR. FIRTHSir, I wish to put a Question to you upon a point of Order in reference to the application of the Standing Order which was passed in November, 1882, as to the abuse of the Rules of the House by "persistently and wilfully obstructing the Business of the House." The Order Book shows that one Member has blocked no fewer than 34 Bills, ranging over the whole area of the legislation proposed during the present Session. They include simple Consolidation Bills, Bills affecting election matters, Bills affecting Ireland, Bills affecting London, Bills relating to the Church, and Bills upon various other subjects. The Question I wish to ask 892 is, Whether this procedure on the part of one hon. Member does or does not come within the Rule as to Obstruction; and, if not, whether there is any Rule that can be applied to a case of this sort?
§ MR. SPEAKERIn reply to the hon. Member for Chelsea, I may say that I am not of opinion that the blocking of Bills, even on the scale referred to by the hon. Gentleman, would bring the Member who should indulge in that practice within the penalties imposed by the Standing Order for "persistently and wilfully obstructing the Business of the House." At the same time, I am bound to say that a wholesale system of throwing obstacles in the way of Bills, not out of consideration for the merits or the demerits of such Bills, but from a desire to prevent the several Bills themselves from being discussed, is, in my opinion, a violation of the spirit of the Rule, and ought to be very much deprecated. But I think it is for the House itself to decide whether the abuse, if it be deemed to be an abuse, has reached such a point as that a remedy ought to be applied in this stage, in order to remove it. I cannot myself but think that the spirit of the Rule is violated, when not only is a Rule which was intended for the promotion of the course of legislation turned into a means of obstructing legislation, but also into a means of withdrawing Bills from the consideration of the House, and thus limiting the discretion of the House itself in dealing with them. As I have stated, the matter is one which rests with the House itself; and it will be for the House to judge whether the abuse is of such a nature as to require a remedy.