COMMITTEE FOR PRIVILEGES (Hansard, 22 January 1964)

THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES: (LORD MERTHYR)
My Lords, I beg to move that this Report be now considered.

LORD MERTHYR
My Lords, I beg to move that this Report be now agreed; and, in so doing, I wish only to apologise to the House in general, and to the noble Lord, Lord Conesford, in particular, for the inaccurate system of commas in the first line of the second paragraph.

LORD SALTOUN
In supporting the Motion I should like to offer three observations, which will not take a very long time. The Committee's Report says: 940 The Committee are of opinion. That, proof of matriculation of arms before the Court of Lord Lyon King of Arms, being arms appropriate to a peerage in the peerage of Scotland, may properly be accepted as sufficient evidence of entitlement to that peerage for the purpose of issuing a writ of Summons to this House in right thereof, unless the Lord Chancellor has information which in his opinion throws doubt upon the validity of the entitlement. I have read the actual words to your Lordships because I very much doubt whether many of your Lordships have the Report in your hands and I think it proper that you should know what the question before your Lordships is.
The first observation I wish to make is that every Scottish Peer will be extremely grateful to the noble Duke, our Lord Clerk Register, for taking the trouble to attend the Committee for Privileges in case it should happen that they had any question to ask of him. Every one of us will be grateful to the noble Duke for that action. My second observation is that I do not think that any Scottish Peer need be worried about the little codicil at the end, referring to the scruples of the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack. Some such provision must necessarily be included, and, as a matter of fact, I am in the happy position, I think, to give a reassurance to any noble Lord who may doubt the effect of it.
By a strange freak of history it happens that a Scottish Peerage is enjoyed by an English family—a family which is intensely English; I do not know whether it has any Scottish blood in it at all. It is English, if I may use an American phrase, from the "Deep South". It has not enjoyed representation, I know, for at least 30 years, and it happens, I believe I am right in saying, that that noble Lord received his Writ of Summons before even the Committee for Privileges began to consider this matter. Therefore, I am quite sure that those noble Lords who live North of the Border will be equally fortunate. Of course, there must come cases of difficulty when the scruples of the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack, whoever he may be at the time, are properly aroused and the matter must be brought to the Committee for Privileges to decide; as, indeed, I think has been the case in the past. Your Lordships will remember that on a previous occasion 941 I pointed out that the fact that a particular Peer has voted at a Peers' election is by no means conclusive proof that he is a Scottish Peer. And if your Lordships have any doubt about that, if you will read the evidence given before a Select Committee of your Lordships which sat on this matter 90 years ago you will see ample evidence in support.
These cases will have to come to the Committee for Privileges, as they have done in the past and will be settled there. But I think that the passing of the Peerage Act and the present situation lay upon your Lordships a certain particular responsibility in respect of this matter; and that is why I am making this statement to-day. Because the whole point, as I understand it, of the Peerage Act, and the most important point, is that somebody shall not fall between two stools, and if a Petition is made to the Committee for Privileges and the Committee reject that Petition, it is extremely important that the Petitioner, whoever he or she may be, should be free to pursue a political life in another direction and not be held between two stools.
Your Lordships may ask: "Why do you lay this responsibility on us? The Committee for Privileges have a matter referred to them and will reply 'Yes' or 'No'. They have no power of action, and this will end the matter so far as the Committee for Privileges are concerned". That is perfectly true. It brings it back to your Lordships, and that is what I am driving at in this matter. As I pointed out to your Lordships when we discussed this matter before, the Petitioner, according to the terms of this recommendation, must come before the Committee with a certificate from the Court of the Lord Lyon about the matriculation of his arms, and he must bring that certificate. Therefore, in such a case, it is open to the Government of the day, whichever Government it may be, to direct the Lord Advocate to take action to reduce the decreet of the Court of the Lord Lyon; and if that is done that will make whoever petitions a commoner, and will enable him or her to pursue a political life in any direction he or she chooses.
It may be done that way, or it may be that the matter is clear without that—I do not know. There remains a doubt, 942 but I know that some action of that sort will clear that point and I think it is very important. It would be a tragedy if, after all this trouble, Her Majesty still had subjects possessing an ancient name and history in her own country who were disabled from any form of political life and had the position of stateless persons. That is the responsibility which I think your Lordships ought freely to undertake and which I hope you will always undertake.
My last observation will be much shorter and of much lighter character, and I have the feeling that possibly some of your Lordships who come from South of the Border may look at this position also in this regard. For a generation—in fact, for as long, I think, as I can remember—the Lord Lyon has been endeavouring to get Peers of Scotland to matriculate their arms. The process entails a certain expense—not exorbitant, but still a material expense. The Peers of Scotland, having regard to the great reputation of their country, have in general, refrained from incurring this expense. Now, as I understand the recommendation before your Lordships, if your Lordships adopt it, the Lord Lyon will be in the position of a wifie who goes out with an apron full of corn; all her wayward chickens will be found racing for her lap.

§ THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH AND QUEENSBERRY
My Lords, may I thank the Committee for Privileges. May I just add that we in Scotland will take care about the evidence of identity and entitlement to sit in your Lordships' House, and while we recognise the responsibility of the Lord Chancellor of the day in these matters, we feel that if we do our job well he will not be called upon to raise any objections.

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
My Lords, I am glad the noble Lord, Lord Saltoun, found it possible to support this Motion. The fact that I do not reply in any detail to what he said will not be taken, I think, as meaning that I am completely in agreement with all he said. I should hesitate to comment upon the manner in which elections of Representative Peers took place in the past. I think that would probably lead me into very deep water.
943 I should like to say how very grateful I am to those of your Lordships who were Members of the Committee for Privileges for the guidance which has now been given to me in the unusual circumstances which have arisen, and I believe that the view the Committee took over the matter, which I hope commends itself to the House, will enable me to issue Writs of Summons in some cases which might otherwise involve the claimant in great trouble and expense. I might perhaps take the opportunity of saying that Writs of Summons are not issued automatically but only on an application being made to me by any claimant to a Scottish Peerage who wishes a Writ. I am, too, grateful to the noble Duke for what he has said, and I am sure that every proper inquiry will in fact be made by Lord Lyon, and the task falling on the Lord Chancellor's shoulders will consequently be greatly alleviated.

§ EARL ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH
My Lords, I am much obliged for the statement of the Lord Chancellor. I am sure that all Members of the Committee for Privileges, in all parts of the House, will appreciate what he said. I hope it will be to the benefit of the future conduct of the business, without any questions being raised again—and we do not want any more raised—if the Lord Chancellor can find time to read the short transcript of the meetings of the Committee for Privileges.