§ LORD G. HAMILTON (Middlesex, Ealing)I wish, Mr. Speaker, to ask your ruling as to the proceedings which occurred in Committee on the Government of Ireland Bill last night in connection with the Closure. It was the impression of all of us who took a share in the discussions by which the Closure was made part of the Standing Orders of the House that the Closure could be moved by anyone without word or comment, or, if a speech were made in making the Motion, it should not be of a controversial character. Last night however, the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary moved the Closure and prefaced his Motion with a speech of a very remarkable character. He began by finding fault with the Opposition with regard to their conduct during the evening, and then the right hon. Gentleman turned to the Chairman and addressed him in the following words:—"I submit, Mr. Mellor, with all respect, that most of what we have heard to-night, including the powerful speech——"
§ MR. SEXTON (Kerry, N.)I rise to Order. Is this in conformity with your repeated rulings when attempts have been made to constitute you a Court of Review upon questions of Order arising in Committee?
§ *MR. SPEAKERI was about to intervene on the same ground. The noble Lord told me that he was going to ask this question, and I hoped that the noble Lord would have dissociated himself from anything that took place last night. Having been asked the question, however, I think that it is my duty to interpret the Standing Order without any intention to reflect on anything or on any hon. Member with regard to the discussion of last night.
§ *LORD G. HAMILTONI wish, Sir, to ask your opinion as to the manner in which the Closure can be moved not only in Committee, but when the Speaker is in the Chair, and I wish to ask whether it is in conformity with the spirit of the Standing Order for any Minister to preface his Motion for the Closure by a speech of a highly controversial character, and stating, with all the skill of an advocate, the reasons why the Closure should be applied?
§ *MR. SPEAKERI take it that the question of the noble Lord is whether the Closure can be moved after a speech has been made on a general subject or after reasons given for moving it. As far as I recollect, a similar question was raised in August, 1887, when a right hon. Gentleman made a long and necessarily controversial speech, and at the end of it moved the Closure. The hon. and learned Member for Louth raised the point, and I then told the hon. and learned Member that the question had been settled by former precedents, and that it was competent for an hon. Member at the close of a speech to move the Closure. But, after an experience of many years, I am bound to say that for an hon. Member to make a controversial speech, and then to move the Closure, is scarcely in conformity with the spirit of the Rule, because such a course shuts out an answer to his speech being given. With reference to the Motion of the Closure, it would be improper and contrary to the spirit of the Rule to move the Closure and then to give reasons; and, therefore, I think it would be improper to give reasons for moving the Closure and then to move it. The question of accepting the Closure is within the discretion of the Speaker or the Chairman, and they would be guided by the circumstances under which the Closure has been moved.
§ MR. T. P. O'CONNOR (Liverpool, Scotland)May I ask whether, after the Closure has been moved by a Minister and accepted by the Chair, it is in Order for hon. Members of the House, especially for right hon. Members on the Front Bench, to meet the action of the Speaker or of the Chairman by cries of "Shame, shame!" or "Scandalous, scandalous!"?
§ *MR. SPEAKERI had hoped that the question would not have been revived. When I resumed the Chair at midnight last night, I stated my opinion with regard to the use of the word "shame." I think that any question which arises in Committee ought to be decided then and there. I hope that I shall not be appealed to in future with regard to what takes place in Committee.
§ MR. T. P. O'CONNORI was not referring to the incident of last night.
§ MR. LABOUCHERE (Northampton)I wish to ask whether, when a 791 Motion is put to report Progress or to adjourn the Debate, and a Division takes place and is finished after 12 o'clock, it is open after the Division for anyone to move the Closure upon the Main Question?
§ MR. HENEAGE (Great Grimsby)Is not this entirely a question for the discretion of the Chair?
§ *MR. SPEAKERIt is entirely a question for the Chairman whether he accepts the Motion. With reference to the question of the hon. Member for Northampton—if a Division on a Motion for reporting Progress or any other question is taking place before the hour for the interruption of Opposed Business, the time for the interruption of business is, so to speak, projected forward, and after the Division on the Motion under decision at the usual hour for the interruption of business it would be competent for an hon. Member to move the Closure.
MR. T. M. HEALYIs it not the case that in the last Parliament a precedent was repeatedly set in this matter?
§ *MR. SPEAKERIt has been done repeatedly.