§ Mr. T. P. O'CONNORI rise to ask the Leader of the House a question, which I will follow up, with your permission, Mr. Speaker, by a question to yourself with reference to an incident which occurred last night. Yesterday an Order in Council was submitted for the approval of Parliament, and after a discussion lasting one hour and ten minutes, a Count was moved, and the House was counted out. I ask the Leader of the House whether the Government regard this incident as a confirmation by the House of the Order in Council, and will the right hon. Gentleman give the House a further opportunity of deciding the question, if needs be, by a Division?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINI think the hon. and learned Gentleman is under a misapprehension. Confirmation by the House in this case is not required, and the Order in Council stands unless the House presents an Address to His Majesty requesting His Majesty to annul the Order. As no such Address has been presented, I understand that we have no power to interfere, and the Order comes into force.
§ Mr. O'CONNORThen I put this as a point of Order for your ruling, Mr. Speaker. I wish to ask whether the Government is not bound to provide a House, to give an opportunity for coming to a definite decision upon an Order in Council, and whether by taking away such opportunity from the House the control of the House over Orders in Council is not reduced to a nullity?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINMay I submit that it has never been the practice for the 268 Government to keep a House for the discussion of Motions of this kind. It has always been considered that it the duty of those who wish to challenge an Order to make a House, and keep the House for their challenge.
§ Sir F. BANBURYIs it not a fact that, under certain Acts of Parliament, powers are given to this House to annul, cancel or alter an Order in Council? The Government have agreed to those powers in Acts of Parliament, and having done that, is it not their duty to see that those Acts of Parliament are carried out, and that they should keep a House for that purpose?
§ Major-General SEELYAm I right in believing that there is no precedent for a Count being moved and accepted under circumstances like those which occurred last night?
§ Mr. O'CONNORMay I also, in addition to what has already been stated, say that there is no precedent, not merely for the House being counted out when an Order in Council is under discussion, but still less for a Count taking place by the direct action of the Government itself when a hundred and fifty Members are within the precincts of the House?
§ Mr. SPEAKERUnless my memory betray me, I think there are numerous cases where a similar thing has happened. Undoubtedly it is for those who bring forward a Motion of this kind to keep a House in being until they go to a Division. That has always been the custom of the House. As has already been pointed out by the Leader of the House, this is an Order which does not require confirmation by the House; in fact, it is the other way round. Hon. Members criticised the Order on the Motion brought forward last night, and, having failed to carry that Motion, the subject falls, for the time being, at any rate.
§ Mr. DEVLINMay I take this opportunity of expressing an opinion upon the method by which this Count was carried last night.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI am afraid in doing that the hon. Member will be starting on a vain quest. All I can do in this matter 269 is to administer the Rules of the House. I have no option. If a single hon. Member move a Count, I am obliged to count the House. If 40 Members do not happen to be present, then the House stands adjourned.
§ Mr. DEVLINMay I ask the Leader of the House whether he will give an opportunity for the further consideration of this matter?
§ Colonel GRETTONIs there anything in the Rules of the House to prevent an hon. Member raising again a question relating to one of these Orders in Council within the prescribed time, nowithstanding that the House has been counted out upon one particular occasion in regard to that subject?
§ Mr. SPEAKERProvided it be within the period set out in the Statute, the Debate on the subject which was discussed last night may be renewed after notice given.
§ Mr. DEVLINMay I ask the Leader of the House whether he will give us an opportunity to discuss this Order in Council before it becomes operative? May I point out that the only chance an hon. Member has of opposing an Order in Council is after 11 o'clock at night. Last night one of the Government's chief supporters, a man of very considerable activity normally, encouraged a Count all over the House, and invited hon. Members to come outside.
§ Mr. SPEAKERWill the hon. Member put his question without the frillings?
§ Mr. DEVLINI will put my question without the frillings. In view of the fact that this matter has not been decided, and that a decision has been prevented by a canvass of the Members of his own side, will the Leader of the House give another definite opportunity of discussing the matter?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINThe proceedings in regard to this case have been pursuant to the Statute. The Order in Council has been laid upon the Table of the House. Such an Order lies on the Table for a certain number of days before it becomes operative.
§ Mr. DEVLINThe hon. Member for Central Hull says that is not right.
Mr. CHAMBERLAINThere the Order lies for a certain number of days, during which it may be challenged before it becomes operative. If it be not challenged within that time, or if the House should not pass an Address requesting His Majesty to disallow it, then it becomes law by force of the Statute, and that will be the case according to the particular Order in Council to-morrow. This Order has been upon the Table of the House since; the 7th February, and it has been open to hon. Members to challenge it since that date. Instead of doing that the hon. Member opposite waited until the very last moment, and he really cannot expect those on the other side of the House to keep a House for him.
§ Mr. DEVLINIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the reason my notice of Motion was not put down earlier was that there were legal proceedings in connection with this matter?
§ Mr. DEVLINWhat security have the minority in this House that they can carry out their functions in Parliament if followers of the Government are to be-allowed to go round canvassing Members, and inviting them to leave the Chamber?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member is not entitled to go into that matter.
§ Captain REDMONDWill you give me leave to move the adjournment of the House in view of the circumstances and of the urgency of the case? The urgency of the case is due to the fact that this Order comes into operation to-morrow, and this is therefore a matter, as I submit with all respect, of definite urgent public importance.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI certainly cannot say that the matter is an urgent one, seeing that it has been before the House since the 7th February.
§ Mr. DEVLINI will call attention to it on the adjournment.