ADJOURNMENT. (Hansard, 11 July 1893)

§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Louth, N.)
said, perhaps he might be allowed, without in the least degree wishing to establish an appeal from the Chairman of Committees to Mr. Speaker, to present to the Speaker a few brief observations on this Motion, and he did so because one of his Colleagues had appeared to incur a certain amount of censure from the Chairman of Committees. He understood the Rule of the House to be this—that whenever a Member was named in the Committee it had always been the practice to report that to the House; but apparently the Rules upon the subject varied. Without proposing to set up the Speaker as an authority of appeal from the Chairman, he would like to point out that in the Debate in moving the adoption of these Rules on the 28th February, 1888, the then Leader of the House (Mr. W. H. Smith) thus expressed himself— The Government felt that, if the House was to maintain its ancient character, power should be given to the Speaker or Chairman of Committees to name a Member on the spot, when the conduct of the Member was grossly disorderly. The view of that right hon. Gentleman was that some indication should be given to the House that the conduct of the Member was grossly disorderly. Rule 27 stated that— Mr. Speaker or the Chairman of Committees shall order Members whose conduct is grossly disorderly to withdraw immediately from the House during the remainder of the Sitting. And the concluding words were— The Member so ordered to withdraw shall forthwith withdraw from the precincts of the House. Therefore it appeared to be the Rule that the hon. Member who had incurred the censure of the Chair was not only to withdraw from the House itself, but from the precincts of the House, and the Serjeant-at-Arms had been good enough 1371 to inform him that he had indicated to his hon. Friend (Mr. Sexton) that he should withdraw from the precincts of the House. It appeared to him that the House and the Committee were entirely different matters. When the House was in Committee it was in Committee; when the House was sitting as the House the Speaker was the organ of the House, and he argued from that that, under the previous Rule which dealt with the question of naming, the fact that a Member had been named in Committee should be reported to the Chair, and that the Chair should put the Question again in the House, and thereupon order the Member, if he be adjudged guilty by the House, to withdraw. It appeared to him that the true construction of the Rules was that, when the House was in Committee, matters which resulted in a Member being ordered to withdraw could not be considered to be within the control of the Committee, so far as the precincts of the House were concerned, unless that Order was afterwards confirmed by the House itself. He had always understood that there was a distinct difference between the House and the Committee. The right hon. Gentleman in the Chair had deemed it his duty to suggest to his hon. Friend to withdraw; the right hon. Gentleman had made no report whatever about the matter, and his hon. Friend had been denied the participation in two Divisions, and in addition to that had had placed upon him the stigma of having to withdraw from the precincts of the House. If that was the intention of the Rule, he ventured to say it was not clearly expressed. A penal Rule should be clearly expressed, and it should not be open to put a construction upon the Rule which would carry it further than the language clearly and plainly went. He contended it was clear that the Chairman of Committees could not order a Member to withdraw from the House and from the precincts of the House; and on the true construction of the Rule he submitted the Speaker should have been informed of what had taken place, and that it was upon the action of the Speaker alone that the order to withdraw from the House and from the precincts of the House should issue.

§ MR. SPEAKER
In answer to the hon. and learned Gentleman, I am sure he would not wish me to refer any further 1372 than I can possibly help to the incidents of this evening. There are two Standing Orders, as the hon. and learned Gentleman has pointed out. One is entitled "Order in Debate: Suspension of Members," and the other "Order in Debate: Disorderly Conduct." The Chairman of Committees is perfectly competent, if circumstances should arise and he may think it necessary, to order an hon. Gentleman to withdraw from the House—I suppose as a lesser degree of punishment than would be entailed if he were named to the House and suspended from the service of the House, the suspension, of course, carrying with it seven days' exclusion from the House, the with drawal from the House only entailing withdrawing from the precincts of the House during that evening. There is no need to refer to the Speaker in the case of an order to withdraw. In the case of a Member being named it would be necessary to refer to the Speaker, and the Speaker comes into the House, and again the Question is put whether the Member shall be suspended or not. But in this case, as I understand it, the Chairman, I suppose, took the more lenient view, so far as the degree of punishment was concerned, and it was within his jurisdiction to do so. I am not, of course, entering into the question of the circumstances, but it was perfectly competent for the Chairman to order the hon. Gentleman to withdraw without reference to the Chair. No reference to the Chair is needed, and I need not say I hope no appeal to the Chair will be made on this or any other occasion.

§ MR. DALZIEL (Kirkcaldy, &c.)
May I ask you, Sir, whether the Rule governing the Order of this House necessitates the sense of the House being taken?

§ MR. SPEAKER
The hon. Gentleman was not named. Naming is quite a different thing from requesting a Member to withdraw from the House, which I understand was the course adopted in the present case. In the case of naming a Member reference is made to the Speaker, the Speaker returns to the House, and the Question is again put to the Whole House. Withdrawal is a matter of summary jurisdiction, if I may use such an expression of the Chairman of Committees.