HC Deb 13 June 1910 vol 17 cc1036-8
Mr. J. M. HENDERSON

asked the Prime Minister if he can state who was responsible for the fact that no proper accommodation was provided for the Members of this House and for Members of His Majesty's Privy Council to view the funeral procession of the late King; and why the Members of this House did not receive the same consideration as on the occasion of the funeral of Her Majesty Queen Victoria?

Mr. EUGENE WASON

asked the First Commissioner of Works if he can state by whose authority the application of late Members of Parliament and Privy Councillors to pass through the House of Commons to Westminster Hall to view the lying-in-state of the late King was refused?

Sir HENRY DALZIEL

asked the First Commissioner of Works whether he can explain why more satisfactory provision was not made for the Members of the House of Commons on the occasion of the funeral of His late Majesty?

The FIRST COMMISSIONER of WORKS (Mr. Harcourt)

The Prime Minister has asked me to answer the question addressed to him, and I will at the same time reply to those put to me which deal with the same subject. State funerals are by custom and tradition under the sole control of the Earl Marshal. On this as on other occasions he was assisted by a committee nominated by himself and consisting of those primarily concerned in the arrangement of the obsequies. It was by the Earl Marshal's directions that admission to the Parliamentary enclosure in Westminster Hall during the Lying-in-State was confined to Peers and Members of Parliament and the ladies they brought with them. The arrangements made for the two Houses of Parliament to view the funeral procession of Queen Victoria gave such universal dissatisfaction that it was decided not to repeat the experiment. No stands or reserved seats were erected for or at the disposal of the Government. I hope the House will believe that, within the limits of my own powers and jurisdiction, I endeavoured to afford them every possible accommodation and consideration.

Sir HENRY DALZIEL

May I ask whether, with regard to the arrangements for the funeral of the late Queen Victoria, the cause of the dissatisfaction was not due to the blunder of the office in charge of the arrangements in putting the stand far too far from the procession, and whether that was not the cause of the dissatisfaction—not the faults which were made with regard to the arrangements? Further, I would ask whether we are to understand from his reply that the Cabinet of the day, in the case of a great State ceremonial of any kind, has no authority to make representations to the Earl Marshal and to make sure that they are respected and attended to.

Mr. EUGENE WASON

Will the right hon. Gentleman have any objection to giving the names of those who were associated with the Earl Marshal in making the arrangements.

Mr. HARCOURT

I have no doubt the Cabinet can make representations to the Earl Marshal. Of course the funeral is not a Government matter, but one relating to the Royal Family, and the Earl Marshal manages these things. My hon. Friend is right in believing that the dissatisfaction was owing to the position of the stand at Queen Victoria's funeral, but it would be difficult, of course, to provide a stand in any other position on this occasion without occupying a space which would have otherwise been available to the public. In reply to the hon. Member (Mr. Wason) the names of those who assisted the Earl Marshal on this occasion, as a committee, were: The Earl Marshal himself, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lord Steward, the Lord Chamberlain, the Master of the Horse, Viscount Esher (Constable of Windsor Castle), the Secretary (Office of Works), Sir William Carrington (Keeper of the Privy Purse), Sir Edward Ward (Secretary to the War Office), Sir Douglas Dawson (Controller in the Lord Chamberlain's Department), Sir Edward Henry (Commissioner of Police), Garter King-at-Arms, General Codrington (Commanding the Home District), Commodore Troubridge (representing the Ad- miralty), and Mr. Harcourt (First Commissioner of Works).

Sir HENRY DALZIEL

Does the right hon. Gentleman contemplate taking any step which will in future ensure that more respect is paid to the Members of the House of Commons?

Mr. HARCOURT

I shall be happy to confer with my hon. Friend in designing such representations.

Mr. JAMES HOPE

Is not the provision of stands, at any rate in the Royal Parks, a matter exclusively under the jurisdiction of the Office of Works?

Mr. HARCOURT

Certainly.

Mr. MARKHAM

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that I telegraphed to a Member of the Government, and that, arising out of that telegram, a correspondence did pass with the Earl Marshal?

Mr. HARCOURT

I know nothing about the hon. Member's telegram.

Mr. BELLOC

Is the Earl Marshal also responsible for no special care having been taken that the staff of the House of Commons should have a special opportunity to see the funeral?