§ MR JOHN REDMOND (Waterford)I desire. Mr. Speaker, to bring under the notice of the House a question of privilege arising out of the painful scene which took place here last night. It will. Mr. Speaker, be within the recollection of the House and yourself that a number of hon. Members of this House were reported to you by name by the Chairman of Committees as having disregarded the authority of the Chair by refusing to take part in a division. In this report to you by the Chairman of Committees certain hon. Members were named and were subsequently suspended from the service of the House, and they were removed by force. The question of privilege which I desire to raise is that several of those hon. Members were reported to you. Mr. Speaker, by the Chairman of Committees as having disregarded the authority of the Chair, without proper steps having been taken to identify them, and in the removal of those hon. Members violence was used of a character—
§ *MR. SPEAKEROrder, order! It is not a question of privilege which the hon. 699 Member is raising; it is purely a question of order. If the hon. Member has any definite point of order to raise, or has any question to put as to something that was out of order, I will answer him. This is not a question of privilege upon which he can base a motion nor upon which he can make a speech.
§ MR. JOHN REDMONDI am very sorry that, unfortunately, I was not in my place last night when the scene took place, but I have noticed by the report in the papers of what took place that you. Mr. Speaker, stated—if you are correctly reported—that a protest against what had taken place could subsequently be made. What I desire to bring under the attention of the House is that, as a matter of order as well as a matter of privilege, although I would claim it as a matter of privilege—[Ministerial cries of "Order, order!"] The question I rose to ask is in regard to the names reported to you of certain Members who were reported to you without proper steps having been taken to identify hon. Members. As a matter of fact, I have satisfied myself that some of the hon. Members who have been suspended had actually gone into the division lobby to take part in the division before the scene arose in the House. This is a matter of such grave importance affecting the right and privileges of the Members who have been suspended that I think an opportunity ought to be given to me of raising the question now.
§ *MR. SPEAKERIt is clearly not a matter of privilege as it stands at present, but a question of order. If there is any instance of the kind mentioned by the hon. Member in which any hon. Member has been reported to me wrongly, and if there has been a mistake, then the proper course would be for the hon. Member to communicate with me—and I regret he did not take that course last night—and inform me that, in point of fact, he did not refuse to leave the House and take part in the division. I am quite certain that the House will not desire to proceed with this matter at the present moment until the hon. Members alluded to have communicated with me. I am quite sure that the House will at once remedy the mistake if it has occurred.
§ MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.)With all due respect to you, Mr. Speaker, I beg to submit that this is really of very vital importance. I will put this question. I am speaking of two concrete instances of two colleagues who are known to myself. I an hon. Member of this House is removed by violence from this House—
§ *MR. SPEAKERThere is no question of privilege at present before the House. The hon. Member is now proceeding to comment again upon the proceedings in the House, and he is out of order.
§ MR. DILLONSurely I am entitled, as any hon. Member of this House is entitled, to submit to you a question on a point of order, which is a question of privilege. If you rule that it is not in order. I shall accept your ruling without question, but I think I am entitled to submit my case.
§ *MR. SPEAKERI have already said that it is not a question of privilege. If, after I have given a ruling on the point, I allow this question to be raised a nun by the hon. Member, I do not know where it will end.
§ MR. DILLONI may be stupid in this matter, but it does seem to me that the question which I wish to raise has not been accurately raised by the hon. Member for Waterford, who spoke before me; and I think the House of Commons might, in a case of this kind, listen to me for a few minutes. The particular case I want to raise is not the case of the bon. Members who refused to leave the House last night, but the case of two hon. Members who stopped me when I was coming into the House and asked me to bring their case under the notice of the Chair. They inform me that they went into the lobby, and were afterwards forcibly removed with violence by the police. I am not in the least desirous of questioning your ruling, Mr. Speaker, but I think that I am entitled to a clear ruling upon this point. My point is this: if an hon. Member of this House who has not in any way infringed the rules of order, by error on the part of the Clerk of the House who has wrongfully reported his name to you and to the Chairman, is removed by violence by the officials of the House and debarred from taking part in the debate, 701 is that not a question of privilege which may be raised by a colleague when the hon. Member alluded to is debarred from attending here to state his own case before the House?
§ *MR. SPEAKERI do not know what are the facts which the hon. Member states. Does the hon. Member say that two of those hon. Members who sit on those benches, whom I requested to leave and who refused to leave, were removed by violence? Is he speaking of their case?
§ MR. DILLONNo, Mr. Speaker. My complaint is that two hon. Members stopped me when I was coming into the House to-day, and stated that yesterday when the division was called on they went into the lobby to vote, but when the doors were unlocked and the names reported one of the Clerks of the House look their names down as having disobeyed the ruling of the Chair, and reported them to the Chairman. I there fore put it to you, Sir, whether that is not a question of privilege, and whether I am not entitled to raise the case of these two hon. Members, who are now wrongfully debarred from coming into the House, as a question of privilege?
§ *MR. SPEAKERNo; for this reason: the Chairman of Committees reported to me that those hon. Gentlemen were present, and refused to go into the lobby, and the House has ordered their suspension. They are prevented from coming here. If they Mill communicate with me and state to me what the facts are, then the matter may he brought before the House. At the present moment it does not seem to me that it is in a position to inquire into this matter unless the hon. Members themselves make these allegations.
§ MR. DILLONWith all due respect. Mr. Speaker, the two hon. Members I allude to have commissioned me to make this application on their behalf, for they stopped me at the outer door as I was coming down to the House. I have always understood that a question of privilege must be raised immediately. What are these two hon. Members to do? May I communicate with them again, and, if they authorise me with a written communication to raise this question. 702 shall I be allowed to deal with it as a question of privilege? I understand that if you do not raise a question of privilege immediately, you are then debarred from raising your point. This is one of the most serious questions of privilege.
§ *MR. SPEAKERIf the hon. Members referred to will communicate to me their precise statements upon the matter, then the House will deal with it.
§ MR. JOHN REDMONDUnder the circumstances of your ruling, Mr. Speaker, which I do not desire to question. I will ask the permission of the House to move the adjournment of the House "to call attention to a matter of definite and urgent public importance—namely, the action the Chairman of Committees in reporting to you certain Members of this House as refusing to take part in a division and disregarding the ruling of the Chair, without proper steps having been taken to identity them, and the application of violence to certain Members of this House."
§ *MR. SPEAKERThat resolution cannot be moved now, because it has been held over and over again that any question affecting the ruling of the Chair, or calling into question the action of the Chair, must be raised upon a substantive motion of which notice has been given, and it cannot be done upon a motion for the adjournment of the House.
§ MR. JOHN REDMONDThat means precluding any possibility of raising this question at all this session, unless the Government see their way to give us an opportunity. I will ask the First Lord of the Treasury, in view of the grave importance of the question which affects the rights of Members who allege that they wire wrongfully treated in the matter, whether he will give the House an opportunity to discuss it.
§ THE FIRST LORD of the TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,) Manchester, E.The ruling, Mr. Speaker, which you have just given practically amounts to this: that the House will have an opportunity of discussing this question as a 703 matter of privilege as soon as the hon. Members who think themselves aggrieved have communicated with yourself in a proper manner, and the facts are laid before the House; then the House may discuss it.
§ *MR. SPEAKERThat is so.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURIf that be, as is intimated to me from the Chair, an accurate statement of Mr. Speaker's ruling, it is clear that the opportunity which the hon. Gentleman desires will be given without the intervention of the Government as soon as the facts are laid before Mr. Speaker, and it will then be open to discussion.
§ MR. DILLONIt is exceedingly important that we should know where we are. Your ruling, as I understand it, is that when you have received a communication from the two hon. Members to whom I have referred it will be competent for ns to discuss a question of privilege; but will that only be a question of privilege as applied to those two hon. Members?
§ *MR. SPEAKERassented.
§ MR. DILLONI understand that to be your ruling. I should like to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he considers that a full discussion of the whole incident? Anybody who has had any experience in this House of debates on questions of privilege knows that the rules of order are very tightly drawn, and we shall be absolutely confined to the discussion of the grievances of those two hon. Members, in regard to whom the question of privilege is raised, and we shall not be in a position to discuss the whole incident.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI understand from the question of the hon. Gentlemen the Member for Waterford that what he desires is an opportunity of discussing the case of these two hon. Members who regard themselves as being aggrieved. That opportunity will be granted as a matter of privilege as soon as the hon. Members have communicated with Mr. Speaker. Now the hon. Gentleman desires that an opportunity should be given for discussing what has occurred to the other hon. Members who were 704 suspended. I am considering that, and also what means may be taken to prevent its recurrence. I think it is possible—but I make no statement at present—that I shall be able to make a statement within a few hours regarding an opportunity being given to discuss both questions.
§ MR. JOHN REDMONDPerhaps I ought to read again the terms of my motion, for the right hon. Gentleman is under a misapprehension. The motion I asked leave to make had reference to the action of the Chairman of Committees, in reporting to you, Sir, certain Members of this House as refusing to take part in a division without taking proper steps to identify them, and the application of violence to certain Members of this House. I hope that if we do get an opportunity of considering the possibility of preventing the recurrence of these scenes in the future, the right hon. Gentleman will take into account in that connection the inadvisability of attempting to closure after one night's debate a Vote of £17,000,000.
§ *MR. SPEAKERThe Clerk will now proceed to read the Orders of the Day.
§ MR. POWER (Waterford, E.)On the point of order, Sir—
§ *MR. SPEAKERIt is too late.
§ *MR. SPEAKERI have already called on the Clerk to read the Orders of the Day.