HC Deb 05 December 1902 vol 116 cc131-2

Point of Practice—

(12.10.) Motion made and Question pro-posed, "That this House, at the rising of the House this day, do adjourn till Monday next."—(Sir Alexander Acland-Hood.)

* MR. GIBSON BOWLES (Lynn Regis)

I desire on this Motion to raise an urgent and important question. This Motion, I may point out, is only necessary because of the exceptional circumstances under which we are met. When Committee of Supply and of Ways and Means is open, the House under Standing Order 18 adjourns automatically from Friday to Monday, but it not being now open, standing Order 18 does not apply, and we come back under the old Rule which enables Members to call attention on the Motion for adjournment to any matters they deem of importance or urgency. I am not, however, going to detain the House at any length. The matter to which I wish to call attention—

* MR. SPEAKER

Order, order! I am not aware of any Rule under which the Motion for adjournment from Friday to Monday may be made the subject of discussion. It is not like a Motion for adjournment over Easter or Whitsuntide, or any unusual period. But this is quite an ordinary proceeding.

* MR. GIBSON BOWLES

I should like to point out, Sir, that Sir Erskine May, in his own last edition, dealing with the Standing Order of 1861, says— Considerable laxity has prevailed in allowing irrelevant speeches upon questions of adjournment, which are regarded as exceptions to the general rule. In 1849 the Speaker endeavoured to enforce a stricter practice, and called upon Members to confine their observations upon such Motion to the question properly before the House—viz., whether the House should adjourn or not. But the House has not since acquiesced in any limitation of the supposed privilege of Members to speak upon every subject but that of the colourable question of adjournment. In moving an adjournment, however, during a debate upon any Question, a Member must confine his remarks to that Question. Until the discontinuance of the weekly question of adjournment from Friday till Monday, in 1861, an inconvenient latitude of discussion was also permitted. Nor did the House deprive Members of this opportunity of raising general debates, without an equivalent; but required the Committee of Supply to be the first Order of the Day on Friday, when there is the like freedom of discussion. Will you allow me to say that, in addition to the Standing Order which I have read, there was Standing Order 11, now repealed, which was as follows:— That, while the Committees of Supply, and Ways and Means are open, the first Order of the Day on Friday shall be either Supply, or Ways and Means, and that on that Order being read, the Question shall be proposed, 'That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair.' I submit as a point of order that while during continuance of order that while during continuance of the Committee of Supply or Ways and Means, the House is, under Standing Order 18, automatically adjourned from Friday to Monday, yet, when, as now, Committee of Supply is not open, we are still under the old Orders of the House and under the old practice, which there is nothing to impair or affect. That being so, I submit that I am within my rights in calling attention to a matter of importance on this Motion.

* SIR CHARLES DILKE () Gloucestershire, Forest of Dean

On the point of Order, may I suggest that the power of raising debate on the Motion is similar to that of calling attention to questions on the Motion for adjournment at the conclusion of the day's sitting? We often do that.

* Mr. SPEAKER

My impression was that this was an obsolete practice. But I am very anxious not to interpose where any doubt can exist with regard to any opportunity of debate which may belong to the House, and therefore I will call on the hon. Member.