§ Sir WILLIAM BYLESI wish to ask with very great respect a question of which I have given you notice, Sir, and that is whether you desire to correct or explain a statement which you made yesterday in which I think you inadvertently fell into an error, and which is reported as follows in the OFFICIAL REPORT:—
Sir W. Byles: Surely I may be allowed to say that there are several Radical Members who had possession of these seats long before the Labour party came, and they have retained them regularly.Mr. Speaker: That is not so; those seats were on the other side of (be House, and. since the Labour party came here in 1900, they have sat there."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 4th December, 1912, col. 2268.]
§ Mr. SPEAKERI am obliged to the hon. Member for pointing that out. I had already corrected it in the OFFICIAL REPORT. It should have been 1910, not 1906.
§ Sir W. BYLESThat does not touch the other point. You said "That is not so" in reply to the allegations which I made that several Radical Members, I think six or eight at least, have regularly sat in these seats ever since the Labour party came across here.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI have no knowledge of that. The only Radical Member I have seen on that seat was the late Sir Charles Dilke, and he always occupied it by leave and licence of the Labour party. He frequently asked if they had any objection to his being there, and it was because they raised no objection that he remained there.
§ Sir W. BYLESIf it is only this seat you are speaking of, Mr. Speaker, I presume that is no embargo on the remaining seats.
§ 4.0 P.M.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI think it is very inconvenient if an hon. Member insists upon 2508 placing himself in the middle of a party which generally occupies that place. It is perfectly true that it does not rest with me; in fact, I have no power to allot seats to any particular individual, and there is no absolute right to any seat, except for right hon. Gentlemen who are Members of the Privy Council, upon the Front Opposition Bench. They have a right there if they choose to exercise it. Of course, Members of the Government have a right to sit upon the Government Bench. It has always been the habit where a small party has been formed that that party should be allowed to sit together for the purposes of consultation and convenience, and hon. Members generally have recognised that and have not put themselves in the middle of that party when it was pretty obvious that they were not wanted.
§ Sir W. BYLESI entirely appreciate and, I hope I may say, entirely concur in the spirit of your observation. I only wanted to point out to you and to the House that I am only one of seven or eight Liberal Members who have steadily sat here ever since the Labour party came in. When I say "here" I do not mean in this particular seat, but upon this bench. Will you allow me one personal word before this incident passes into the, obscurity from which it should never have emerged. I only want to say to you, Sir, and to the House, that I am the last man who would desire to sit anywhere where I am unwelcome. I desire to be, and I hope I am, on amicable terms with every single one of my colleagues in the House of Commons, and my only object has been to assert the immemorial right of any Member of this House to sit where he pleases.
§ Mr. JOYNSON-HICKSArising out of the statement you, Sir, have just made, and without in any way binding you, would it be possible for you to make some suggestion to Members of the House that the Conservative party should be allotted some more seats owing to their rapidly increasing numbers?
§ Mr. SPEAKERIf their numbers increase so rapidly as all that, I think they will be quite able to take care of themselves.