§ Mr. DILLWYN (Swansea)
I beg to move the Adjournment of the House, in order to call attention to a definite matter of urgent public importance—namely, the irregularities that have taken place in a trial at law, whereby certain Members of this House are prejudiced.
§ Mr. SPEAKER
The hon. Member for Swansea (Mr. Dillwyn) proposes to move the Adjournment of the House, in order that he may "call attention to a definite matter of urgent public importance—namely, the irregularities that have taken place in a trial at law whereby certain Members of this House are prejudiced." The hon. Member showed me a Notice a few minutes ago which was substantially the same as this, and which I informed him I could not put to the House. Nor shall I put this Notice to the House. My Predecessor in the chair was asked a question in 1882, shortly after the new Rule had been passed respecting the making of Motions for Adjournment, previous to Public Business being entered upon. He was asked whether a Member proposing to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a matter of urgent public importance, would be debarred from doing so by the fact of a Motion standing on the Notice Paper which dealt with the same subject, in pursuance of the practice that no Motion can be submitted to the House upon a question on which there is a Motion already standing on the Order Book. My Predecessor, acting on the practice of the House, said that a Member would be debarred by the established and fundamental Rules of Debate. Now, there is already a Notice on the Paper standing in the name of the hon. Gentleman for West Belfast (Mr. Sexton) for Tuesday, the 1st of March, in these terms—Mr. Sexton—Jury-packing: To call attention to the purpose, method and effects of the system of jury-packing pursued by agents of Her Majesty's Government in Ireland; and to move a Resolution.That is a Motion which is down for a particular day, and the Motion which the 1778 hon. Gentleman has just proposed to move is a distinct anticipation of that Motion. Therefore, I cannot put it to the House.
§ Mr. SEXTON (West Belfast)
Upon your ruling, Sir, I would respectfully submit to you, firstly, that the terms of my Resolution are not on the Paper; and secondly, that my Resolution does not bear, nor is it intended to bear, on any proceedings by which any Member of this House is prejudiced.
§ Mr. SPEAKER
The Resolution which is down on the Paper for Tuesday, the 1st of March, in the name of the hon. Member, specifically mentions the question of jury-packing. When the hon. Member for Swansea some time ago, gave me a Notice of Motion for the Adjournment of the House in a slightly altered form to that which he has now made, the question of jury-packing was specially referred to in it.
The following is the Entry in the Votes:—Adjournment of the House.—Mr. Dillwyn, Member for Swansea, asked leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, viz., "to call attention to irregularities which have taken place in a trial at law, whereby certain Members of this House are prejudiced:"—But it appearing to Mr. Speaker that the subject which the honourable Member a3ked leave to discuss was included in the Notice of Motion which stood upon the Notice Paper for Tuesday, the 1st of March, in the name of the honourable Member for West Belfast, Mr. Speaker declined to submit that Motion to the pleasure of the House.