HL Deb 29 January 1908 vol 183 cc5-7

"Writs and Returns electing the Lord Curzon of Kedleston a Representative Peer for Ireland in the room of the late Lord Kilmaine, deceased, with the certificate of the Clerk of the Crown in Ireland annexed thereto: delivered (on oath), and certificate read as follows:— Crown and Hanaper Office in Ireland. In pursuance of an Act passed in the Parliament of Ireland in the fortieth year of the reign of His late Majesty King George the Third intituled 'An Act to regulate the mode by which the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Commons to serve in the Parliament of the United Kingdom on the part of Ireland shall he summoned and returned to the said Parliament,' I hereby certify that the several Writs hereunto annexed for electing a Temporal Peer of Ireland in the room of Francis William, Baron Kilmaine, deceased, did issue from this the Crown Office in Chancery in Ireland to the Peers therein severally named, and the said Peers did severally make the Returns thereto which to the said Writs are respectively annexed. And I do further certify that it appears from the said Writs and Returns that the right hon George I Nathaniel, Baron Curzon of Kedleston, has been chosen by a majority of votes to be the Peer to sit and vote on the part of Ireland in the House of Lords of the United Kingdom in the room of Francis William, Baron Kilmaine, deceased. And whereas the name of the said George Nathaniel, Baron Curzon of Kedleston, is not upon the Roll of the Peers of Ireland whose right to vote at the elections of Representative Peers for Ireland has been certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments of the United Kingdom into the Crown Office in Chancery in Ireland by direction of the House of Lords as having been admitted by the House of Lords, I do further certify that it appears from the said Writs and Returns that the right hon. Frederick Oliver, Baron Ashtown, whose name is upon the aforesaid Roll of the Peers of Ireland, has received the next highest number of votes. All which I attest this 21st day of January, 1908.

" Clerk of the Crown and Hanaper and

Permanent Secretary to the Lord

Chancellor of Ireland.

"To the Clerk of the Parliaments of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland."

THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord LOREBURN)

Your Lordships will observe that this Return is not in the usual form, and that it contains more than is required by the Statute. The object, I presume, is to place the House in a position to decide whether a writ should issue to Lord Curzon or not. The point raised is whether Lord Curzon, not having claimed his right to vote for a representative peer for Ireland, and, consequently. no such claim having been admitted, is thereby disabled from being elected. Your Lordships will probably expect my opinion on the point. I have examined the Act of Union and am satisfied that Lord Curzon, whose name appears on the Ulster roll as a temporal peer of Ireland, might properly be elected, although he has made no claim to be entitled to vote for a representative peer. The Act requires that those who vote for a representative peer shall have claimed and had their claim admitted by this House, but the Act makes no requirements as to the person to be elected, except that he should be a temporal peer of Ireland. There are certain precedents quoted to a Committee of your Lordships' House in 1874 which, perhaps, favour this view, but I prefer to rely upon the Act itself. The Act, I think, is clear, and in my opinion Lord Curzon is entitled to his writ and to take his seat in the ordinary course.

THE EARL OF HALSBURY

I am sure the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack requires no confirmation from me; but it may be satisfactory to him if I say that I entirely concur in the view he has expressed. Some ingenious person appears to have suggested that something should be read into the Act of Union which is not in it—namely, that an elector must be an elector before he can be elected, for which there is not the slightest foundation. I note that the noble and learned Lord quoted a certain precedent. I confess that if the matter were decided upon the precedents I should feel some doubt, but really there is no point at all. Unless you put a new section into the Act of Union there cannot be the least doubt. The noble and learned Lord said the point intended to be raised was so and so. I can only say that to my mind there is no point at all in the matter.

Then the Lord Curzon of Kedleston took the Oath.