HC Deb 07 February 1867 vol 185 cc83-6
LORD ERNEST BRUCE

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, By whose authority Sir Richard Mayne, Chief Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis, issued certain Orders to the police that no Members of Parliament be allowed to approach the Houses of Parliament in their carriages after a certain hour on the occasion of Her Majesty graciously opening Parliament in person; and why, when they were by this order obliged to descend from their carriages, no path whatever was kept open for them; whether it was not the undoubted constitutional right of Members to attend Her Majesty on such an occasion; and whether such Order of the Commissioner of Police was not in direct defiance of a Sessional Order of that House; and why the hoarding the whole length of Bridge Street was kept, and still kept, entirely closed?

MR. CRAWFORD

said, that as this was a question which concerned very nearly the privileges of the House, he claimed this opportunity of stating, by way of complaint, what his own experience had been in coming from the City on Tuesday last. On arriving at the Surrey side of Westminster Bridge he was stopped by a cordon of police and informed that he could not pass over the bridge. He stated that he was a Member of the House of Commons, and was proceeding to Westminster to discharge a public duty. Some demur was made, but eventually he was allowed to go on. On arriving at the Westminster side of the bridge, he found that he could not reach the House by the usual mode of access through Palace Yard in consequence of the hoarding which had been extended much further than it was last Session. He found also that Bridge Street was entirely blocked up by an immense concourse of persons, so that he could not get through by that route. There was no policeman at hand to refer to; and he had, therefore, to consider whether he should force his way through the crowd, or choose the alternative of re-crossing the bridge and going over Lambeth or Blackfriars Bridge. Finding retreat very difficult, he essayed the task of finding his way through the crowd. After considerable difficulty he succeeded in getting through the barrier to the other side owing to the friendly intervention of a policeman. When he reached Parliament I Street he was in a state in which it would hardly have been decent to present himself to that House. His boots had been trodden on, and his clothes were covered with mud. Now, what happened to him happened also to several other Members of that House, among whom he might mention the Member for Dover, the Member for Buckingham, the Member for Inverness, and the Member for Bridgwater. The hon. Member for Inverness had to return over Westminster Bridge and proceed in a cab over Waterloo Bridge, and so to Charing Cross, where he was told he must alight. He did so, and proceeded on foot to the House through the pelting rain and mud two inches deep. On the other side of Westminster Bridge Members were called on to identify themselves by showing their cards or in some other way. Now, he maintained this was subjecting them to a great indignity. He did not complain on account of his personal inconvenience—indeed, it might be regarded as a subject of pleasantry by some persons—and as for the crowd he had no complaint to mate against them, as he had never seen so vast a concourse of people in such good spirits and so happy. He should, in fact, be the last person to complain of their very natural hilarity, and had no wish to interfere with what was regarded as an annual holyday. What he complained of was the manner in which the Police Order had been issued. No steps had been taken to provide that persons coming from the City to the House of Parliament over Westminster Bridge—as he himself had been accustomed to do for the last ten years—should not be debarred from coming to the House. He wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether the Order issued by Sir Richard Mayne was an annual one, and issued as a matter of course; and, whether steps would be taken on similar occasions to facilitate the access of Members to the House?

MR. WALPOLE

With regard to the observations which have just fallen from the hon. Member for the City of London (Mr. Crawford), I have to say that I was not aware of the personal inconvenience to which he had been exposed on the occasion of the opening of Parliament, or I should have made particular inquiries into the matter. In regard to the Question addressed to me by the noble Lord (Lord Ernest Bruce), I think he will find he is entirely mistaken in his impression as to the Orders issued to the police. The noble Lord asks "by whose authority Sir Richard Mayne, Chief Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis, issued certain Orders to the police that no Members of Parliament be allowed to approach the Houses of Parliament in their carriages after a certain hour on the occasion of Her Majesty graciously opening Parliament in person?" And then he goes on to ask, "Why, when they were by this Order obliged to descend from their carriages, no path whatever was kept open for them?" Now, my reply is simply this. No such Order as is referred to in that Question has been issued by Sir Richard Mayne. I hold in my hand extracts from the Orders issued by Sir Richard Mayne in reference to the access of Members to the Houses of Parliament, which will clear up the misapprehension existing on the subject. The first extract is this— No carriage or vehicle of any sort is to be allowed to pass between Charing Cross and the Houses of Parliament from the hours of 11 a.m. until 4 p.m., except the carriages of Peers and Members of the House of Commons, or those of persons having tickets of admission to the Houses of Parliament, or of persons going to any house between Charing Cross and Abingdon Street. The carriages of persons having tickets of admission to the Houses of Parliament, or those going to any house between Charing Cross and the Houses of Parliament, may pass until 1 p.m., and the carriages of Peers or Members of Parliament may pass until the arrival of the procession of Her Majesty at the Horse Guards, after which hour no carriages are to be permitted to pass between Charing Cross and Abingdon Street until Her Majesty has passed through Whitehall on returning from opening Parliament. Hon. Members are mistaken, therefore, in supposing that any Order was given that Members of Parliament should be stopped. If any Member was required to alight from his carriage and walk through the mud, contrary to this Order, I regret it very much. But, there was also an Order issued with regard to the approach over Westminster Bridge. This particular Order directs that— Every possible facility is to be given to the carriages of Peers and Members of the House of Commons in proceeding to and leaving the Houses of Parliament. The police had strict injunctions to act upon these Orders. If they mistook their instructions, and if any Member of Parliament was put to inconvenience, all I can say, as I have said before, is that I extremely regret it. One word with regard to the crowd of which the hon. Gentleman opposite complains. This year there was an unusual crowd between the Houses of Parliament and Parliament Street, partly in consequence of the works there. The hoarding raised is one necessary for the works, and temporary inconvenience is thereby occasioned. The approaches from Victoria Street and the end of Bridge Street are closed, and on Tuesday the foot passengers collected in such crowds between Parliament Street and Westminster Bridge, that it was hardly in the power of the police to keep a passage clear. This is the explanation which I have to offer. If the hon. Gentleman opposite has any further complaint to make, I shall be happy to inquire into it. With reference to his last observation, that instructions should be given in future to prevent inconvenience to Members of Parliament, I may say that such instructions shall certainly be given, and that any additional precaution which may tend to prevent inconvenience shall be taken.