HC Deb 14 June 1917 vol 94 cc1137-8
Mr. J. M. ROBERTSON

I desire to ask, Sir, whether your attention has been called to the fact that in the Division on the matter of proportional representation, the night before last, the Ayes were announced by the Tellers as numbering 149, whereas the printed list of names showed only 148; whether it is the fact that the Tellers concerned had made different estimates and agreed to split the difference; and whether in such cases this erroneous statement of the Tellers remains on the records of the House as to the vote of the House, or whether, in such a case, the correct number given by the printed list of members should be taken, or can be made to be taken, as the true vote of the House?

Major NEWMAN

I may say that what the hon. Gentleman states is quite true. I courted 148, but the hon. Baronet the-Member for St. Pancras counted 150. I was sure that I was right, but as he is my senior in military rank I gave way to him, and accepted that we should "split, the difference."

Mr. SPEAKER

That is a warning not to leave the matter to the House of Commons. In reply to the question put to me by the right hon. Member for Tyneside, there is no power in me or anybody else to-alter the record as announced by the Tellers. We must assume that the Tellers announced the fact, but if the records afterwards show that it was not the fact, so much the worse for the Tellers.

Mr. DEVLIN

In view of what is admitted by the Tellers, in regard to this highly unparliamentary proceeding, may I ask whether this is to be regarded as the actual judgment of the House of Commons on this question, or whether the House will be given an opportunity of reconsidering it.

Mr. SPEAKER

There would be an opportunity in the Committee stage to reconsider it.

Sir d. D. REES

Will it be possible to reconsider that considered judgment of the House upon the Clause in the Bill, dealing with the matter.

Mr. SPEAKER

The question of proportional representation can be reconsidered on the Bill, or is capable of being reconsidered on the Bill.

Sir J. D. REES

Have you not ruled. Sir, in similar cases, where a matter has received the considered judgment of the House, that it could not on subsequent occasions be the subject of discussion, Debate and vote?

Mr. SPEAKER

I am not aware of ever having ruled anything of the sort, or I should on very many occasions have shortened the time spent on Debate.