HC Deb 03 July 1890 vol 346 cc679-81
MR. CAVENDISH BBNTINCK (Penryn and Falmouth)

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has seen a paragraph in the Times newspaper of Tuesday to the effect that certain persons, styling themselves "the Open Air Meeting Committee," intend to march in procession from Clerkenwell Green to Hyde Park on Saturday next; and whether he will take steps to prevent proceedings and obstructions in the public thoroughfares, which are contrary to the wishes of the ratepayers and inhabitants of the Metropolis, and which materially interfere with their ordinary occupations and business?

MR. PICKERSGILL (Bethnal) Green, S. W.

Has the attention of the right hon. Gentleman been called to the decision of the Lord Chief Justice in the case of the "Queen against Booth and others," in which Lord Coleridge laid down that processions in Whitechurch, although creating a temporary incon- venience, were not unlawful, and did not I constitute an indictable offence?

MR. MATTHEWS

I have not yet had the advantage of perusing the Lord Chief Justice's judgment. In regard to the question on the Paper, I am informed by the Commissioner of Police that he has no knowledge of any such procession beyond what is stated in the paper referred to. As usual on such occasions, steps will be taken by him to prevent, as far as possible, obstruction in the streets, and inconvenience to the inhabitants of the Metropolis.

MR. DILLON

On a point of order, Sir, I would direct your attention to the form of the question. In the latter part of it it states that certain proceedings are "contrary to the wishes of the ratepayers and inhabitants of the Metropolis." I wish to ask you whether that statement, being one of a highly debatable character, ought to appear on the Paper, especially in view of the severity with which Irish questions are edited?

*MR. SPEAKER

Any allegation of a fact which is disputed ought not to appear in a question. This, however, is rather an expression of opinion than a statement of fact; but I think it we aid have been better if it had not been put in.

MR. SEXTON

I would ask you, Sir, whether expressions of opinion, as well as matters of argument, are not equally prohibited by the Standing Orders?

*MR. SPEAKER

It is contrary to the rule to ask a Minister what his opinions are on a given point. Expressions of opinion and allegations of fact that are disputed had better be avoided.

MR. CUNINGHAME GRAHAM

I understand you to say, Sir, that this question is objectionable, and, as two or three similar questions have been put, I would ask whether you will direct that such questions are to be ruled out of order?

*MR. SPEAKER

Yes; I can always direct a question to be ruled out of order if I think it to be so.

*MR. CREMER (Shoreditch, Haggerston)

I would ask, Sir, by whose authority the question appears in its present form, because repeatedly it has happened that questions handed in at the Table are edited and expressions of opinion struck out, when the question is put by any Member on this side of the House?

*MR. SPEAKER

The hon. Member is under some misapprehension. This question was not altered; it was an omission that it was not noticed. I think it ought to have been altered, but in the multiplicity of questions it escaped notice.

Forward to