UCSB LIBRARY 
 
 Y- 
 
 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT
 
 THE 
 
 BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 BY 
 
 MICHAEL MACDONAGH 
 
 AUTHOR OF " BISHOP DOYLE ; A BIOGRAPHICAL AND 
 HISTORICAL STUDY " 
 
 LONDON 
 ISBISTER AND COMPANY LIMITED 
 
 15 & 16 TAVISTOCK STREET, COVENT GARDEN 
 1897
 
 Printed l>y BALLANTVNE, HANSON & Co. 
 London and Edinburgh
 
 DEDICATED HY PERMISSION 
 TO 
 
 THE RIGHT HON. W. E. GLADSTONE 
 
 WHOSE NAME IS INSEPARABLY ASSOCIATED 
 
 WITH THE GREAT TRADITIONS 
 
 OF PARLIAMENT
 
 PREFACE 
 
 I DESIRE to say a few words in explanation of the aim 
 and scope of this work. Of books about Parliament 
 there is no lack. There are many Constitutional 
 Histories, written by erudite historians and philosophic 
 students of institutions, and also several legal text- 
 books compiled by learned lawyers. " The Book of 
 Parliament," however, does not aspire to be classed with 
 grave and profound treatises on Parliamentary govern- 
 ment, or ponderous repositories of the technicalities of 
 Parliamentary law and procedure. But there has 
 hitherto been no complete picture of the two Houses of 
 the Legislature engaged in the work of law-making, and 
 my aim in writing this book has been to provide such a 
 view of what I may call the human side of Parliament. 
 I trace the progress of a Parliament from the General 
 Election, when it is constituted by the votes of the 
 }x;ople, until the day the Sovereign, on the advice of the 
 Cabinet, pronounces the sentence of its dissolution. I 
 describe the framework of the Legislature, the machinery 
 by which it is worked, its chief officers, its ceremonies, 
 usages, and customs quaint, old-world, and impressive 
 its curious contrasts of dread solemnity and light-hearted
 
 viii PREFACE 
 
 gaiety ; the forces which move it and direct its course ; 
 how Administrations are made ; the duties of Ministers ; 
 the pleasures and woes of members of Parliament ; how 
 Public and Private Bills are passed ; how Supplies are 
 voted ; the mode in which the proceedings of both 
 Houses are reported for the newspapers ; and the varied 
 elements, aspects, and humours of Parliament, whether 
 it be regarded as the historic temple of British liberties 
 with its sacred memories and its heart-stirring associa- 
 tions ; the scene of glorious achievements in oratory ftnd 
 statesmanship ; the place where questions affecting the 
 well-being of the community are determined ; or the 
 field upon which the great and exciting duel between 
 Parties is fought at close quarters. 
 
 I have made some excursions into the domain of 
 history. That, of course, was inevitable in writing about 
 Parliament, whose roots lie so deep in the mighty past. 
 But I have avoided as much as possible the broad beaten 
 tracks of history ; and have turned down unfrequented 
 and little-trodden byways in search of fresh and apt 
 anecdotes to enliven and illustrate and confirm my 
 descriptions of the present work-a-day aspects of Parlia- 
 ment. My chief purpose has been to make the book 
 entertaining and instinctive to the general reader to 
 the millions of men and women of all sorts and condi- 
 tions in this world-wide Empire of which Parliament is 
 the supreme ruler. But I trust the book will also be 
 found useful to members of Parliament, lawyers, 
 journalists, students of Constitutional history to all,
 
 PREFACE ix 
 
 in fact, who are brought by profession or study into 
 close relations with the Legislature. 
 
 The book is the fruit of nearly ten years 1 first-hand 
 observation of the working of both Houses of Parliament, 
 as a descriptive writer and reporter, and of a close study 
 of their history, traditions, laws, and procedure. Some 
 of the chapters have appeared as articles in Good 
 Words, Chambers' 1 s Journal, Temple Bar, TJie Nine- 
 teenth Century, and Macmillans Magazine; and for 
 permission to reproduce them, I am indebted to the 
 editors of these magazines. 
 
 MICHAEL MACDONAGH. 
 
 LONDON, February 1897.
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 CHAP. PAGE 
 
 I. WOOING THE ELECTORS ..... 1 
 
 II. AT THE POLLING BOOTHS . . . . .24 
 
 III. "M.P." . . . . . . . .51 
 
 IV. THE PALACE OF WESTMINSTER . . . .79 
 V. OPENING OF A NEW PARLIAMENT . . . . Q6 
 
 VI. MR. SPEAKER . . . . . . .115 
 
 VII. TAKING THE OATH OF ALLEGIANCE . . .133 
 
 VIII. MAKING A GOVERNMENT . . . . . .148 
 
 ix. HER MAJESTY'S MINISTERS . . . .166 
 
 x. "THE QUEEN'S SPEECH" ..... 184 
 
 XI. THE SERJEANT-AT-ARMS ..... 204 
 
 XII. THE COMMONS AT WORK . . . . .217 
 
 XIII. GETTING A BILL THROUGH PARLIAMENT . . 248 
 
 XIV. " BLACK ROD'S " KNOCK . 274 
 XV. A NIGHT IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS . . . 284 
 
 XVI. THE HOUSE OF LORDS AS A COURT OF APPEAL . 300 
 
 xvii. THE REPORTERS' GALLERY . . . . .310 
 
 XVIII. FROM THE LOBBY OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS . 330
 
 xii CONTENTS 
 
 CHAP. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 xix. THE QUEEN'S REPORTER 
 
 XX. WHIPPING M.P.S TO WESTMINSTER 
 XXI. VOTING SUPPLIES IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS 
 XXII. PRIVATE BILL LEGISLATION . 
 XXIII. THE DISSOLUTION 
 
 INDEX .... . 438
 
 WOOING THE ELECTORS 
 
 AT the General Election is witnessed the old, familiar, 
 but ever curious and interesting spectacle, of at least 
 a thousand gentlemen of all sorts and conditions, en- 
 gaged in wooing the electors of the constituencies which 
 have at their disposal the 670 seats of the House of 
 Commons. 
 
 But in addition to this local wooing, conducted in 
 each constituency by the candidates, their agents and 
 their active partisans, during the election, there is the 
 general work, or the work of educating political opinion 
 in the country as a whole, and of organising it in 
 the interest of party, which is managed from the head- 
 quarters of the great central party organisations in 
 London, such as the National Conservative Union, and 
 the National Liberal Federation, and which goes on 
 unceasingly from year to year, no matter what party 
 may be " in " or what party may be " out. v or how 
 remote may be the prospect of a General Election. This 
 modern mode of wooing the electors by means of the 
 caucus as the machinery for promoting party interests 
 in the constituencies is called used to be regarded in 
 this country not very long ago with disfavour and suspi- 
 cion by constitutional purists and pedants. It was said 
 that under this system an importation from the United 
 
 A
 
 2 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 States the free and independent expression of the 
 opinion and will of the electorate was impossible. Local 
 initiative and local independence were crushed out of 
 existence. The electors became a passive, unthinking 
 mass in the hands of able and not too scrupulous 
 organisers, and voted as they were directed from head- 
 quarters. But these sombre views of the methods and 
 results of the caucus are no longer entertained. Govern- 
 ment by party, or the administration of the affairs of 
 the State in accordance with the political principles 
 entertained by the majority of the electorate as shown 
 by the composition of the House of Commons after a 
 General Election, is an integral part of our Constitu- 
 tion ; and it is now generally recognised that no 
 party can hope to effect its object to obtain control 
 of the machinery of government in these days of a 
 democratic franchise, unless it possesses a powerful 
 organisation to educate the voters in its political prin- 
 ciples and policy, to make itself acquainted with the 
 wants and aspirations of the people, and to drill its 
 followers for the great battle for supremacy in the 
 House of Commons which is waged at the General 
 Election. 
 
 This machinery is adequately supplied by the two 
 great rival political organisations. Their methods of 
 propagandism are practically similar. The basis of each 
 is the affiliated branches in every polling district. Each 
 branch sends a representative to the council of the con- 
 stituency ; the chairmen and two members of these local 
 councils, together with the principal legal party agent 
 in each constituency, form the council of the county or 
 of the borough. This in its turn elects three members 
 to serve with its chairman upon the central council,
 
 WOOING THE ELECTORS .'* 
 
 which, with the aid of a big " war chest " mainly supplied 
 by the donations of rich members of the party, exercises 
 all executive powers. 
 
 The respective headquarters in London of the National 
 Liberal Federation and the National Conservative Union 
 are, as may be imagined, busy centres during the General 
 Election. In electioneering, as in military campaigning, 
 good generalship at headquarters is of paramount im- 
 portance. Large additional staffs of officials are, there- 
 fore, engaged at both offices all day, and all night too 
 verv often, attending under the direction of an able and 
 astute commander-in-chief to the requests of the com- 
 batants in the constituencies for munitions of war. Piles 
 of posters, pamphlets, leaflets, squibs and cartoons, of a 
 general partv character, are dispatched to every consti- 
 tuency the local needs of the contest, such as addresses 
 to the electors, and the publication of facts, contradic- 
 tions, and squibs of particular interest to the consti- 
 tuency, being provided by the candidate or the local 
 organisation. A large portion of this enormous amount 
 of printing is given away gratis by the central bodies. 
 If a charge be made it is only what suffices to cover the 
 bare cost of production. Uut that is not all. Special 
 speakers, eloquent and gifted, fully equipped with every 
 fact that tells in favour of the cause, are sent some as 
 volunteers, some at large fees to constituencies that 
 are either weak locally in talking power and are hard 
 pressed by the enemy, or where an early victory would 
 largely influence the final result of the campaign. 
 
 Meantime, the literature from headquarters or locally 
 provided is effectively distributed in the constituencies. 
 Every available wall is covered with the posters and 
 cartoons ; the leaflets fall like snow-flakes on every
 
 4 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 household. It is a time of great local excitement and 
 commotion. Strong party adherents fill their windows 
 with election cards. Turn down any street, no matter 
 how quiet and no matter how mean, and you see an 
 amusingly mixed display of the cards of the rival can- 
 didates, while neighbours who have hitherto lived 
 in amity and peace, now glance askance, if they do 
 not actually scowl at each other, as they find them- 
 selves on opposite sides in the campaign. The noise of 
 drums and brass instruments fills the air. The roar of 
 the spouter is heard out of doors, and indoors the sweet 
 beguiling tones of the canvasser fall on the ear. From 
 house to house the candidate treads his way soft of 
 speech, cajoling, flattering, profuse of promises and 
 pledges attended by his faithful friends, 
 
 To point the path, the missing link supply, 
 Oft prompt a name and hint with word or eye ; 
 Back each bold pledge, the fervid speech admire, 
 And still add fuel to their leader s Jlre. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone often said that in all his long life, in 
 all the exciting political scenes he had gone through 
 making Cabinets and taking part in momentous decisions 
 on peace and war he had never experienced anything 
 to compare for excitement with his first contest for 
 Newark in 1832. At that time there were 2000 houses 
 in the borough, and the custom was for the candidates 
 to go into every house whether it was occupied by an 
 elector or a non-elector to ask the elector for his vote 
 and the non-elector for his influence; but Mr. Glad- 
 stone was five times in every house in the town, making 
 10,000 visits in all. On the other hand, Macaulay, 
 like other eminent publicists of the past, was strongly
 
 WOOING THE ELECTORS 5 
 
 opposed to canvassing. During the contest for the 
 representation of Leeds in 1832 after the passing of 
 the Reform Act he refused to ask a single elector 
 personally for his vote. 
 
 The practice of begging for votes is, as it seems to me 
 [he wrote], absurd, pernicious, and altogether at variance 
 with the true principles of representative government. 
 The suffrage of an elector ought not to be asked or to be 
 given as a personal favour. It is as much for the interest 
 of the constituents to choose well, as it can be for the 
 interest of a candidate to be chosen. To request an honest 
 man to vote according to his conscience is superfluous. To 
 request him to vote against his conscience is an insult. 
 The practice of canvassing is quite reasonable under a 
 system in which men are sent to Parliament to serve 
 themselves. It is the height of absurdity under a system 
 in which men are sent to Parliament to serve the public. 
 While we had only a mock representation it was natural 
 enough that this practice should be carried to a great 
 extent. I trust it will soon perish with the abuses from 
 which it sprang. I trust that the great and intelligent 
 body of people who have obtained the elective franchise 
 will see that seats in the House of Commons ought not to 
 be given, like rooms in an almshouse, to urgency of solicita- 
 tion, and that a man who surrenders his vote to caresses 
 and supplication forgets his duty as much as if he sold it 
 for a banknote. 
 
 No doubt the work of canvassing has features that 
 must always make it repugnant to supersensitive natures. 
 Most candidates would probably be glad to be able to 
 dispense with it altogether. It has, indeed, been often 
 suggested that it would be well to include it in the 
 practices that are declared by statute to be corrupt and
 
 6 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 illegal at elections. But the general opinion seems to 
 be that however distasteful canvassing may be to the 
 candidate, it is desirable that he should be to the 
 electors not merely an abstraction or a name, but a 
 man ; and that there should be that free personal inter- 
 course and interchange of opinions between him and 
 those whose suffrages he solicits which canvassing pro- 
 vides. 
 
 The pleasantest picture of canvassing in literature is 
 one drawn from life by the charming pen of William 
 Cowper. During the famous General Election of 1784, 
 following on the contemptuous dismissal of the Coalition 
 Administration of Lord North and Charles James Fox 
 in the previous year by George III. and the consequent 
 appointment of the youthful Pitt as Prime Minister for 
 the first time, the poet, who had j ust finished " The 
 Task," and was engaged on his inimitable ballad of 
 "John Gilpin," took up his residence at Olney in 
 Buckinghamshire, when one day his retirement was 
 disturbed by the visit quite " without your leave " of an 
 aspiring M.P., Mr. William W. Grenville (cousin of 
 Pitt), accompanied by a retinue of zealous supporters. 
 
 We were sitting yesterday [writes Cowper], after dinner, 
 the two ladies and myself, very composedly, and without 
 the least apprehension of any such intrusion in our snug 
 parlour, one lady knitting, the other netting, and the 
 gentleman winding worsted, when, to our unspeakable 
 surprise, a mob appeared before the window, a smart raj) 
 was heard at the door, the boys hallooed, and the maid 
 announced Mr. Grenville. " Puss " (the tame hare) was 
 unfortunately let out of her box, so that the candidate, 
 with all his good friends at his heels, was refused admission 
 to the grand entry, and referred to the back door as the
 
 WOOING THE ELECTORS 7 
 
 only possible way of approach. Candidates are not creatures 
 to be susceptible of affronts, and would rather, I suppose, 
 climb in at a window than be absolutely excluded. In a 
 minute the yard, the kitchen, and the parlour were filled. 
 Mr. Grenville, advancing towards me, shook me by the 
 hand with a degree of cordiality that was extremely 
 seducing. As soon as he, and as many more as could find 
 chairs, were seated, he began to open the intent of his 
 visit. I told him I had no vote, for which he readily gave 
 me credit. I assured him I had no influence, which he 
 was not equally inclined to believe, and the less, no doubt, 
 because Mr. Ashburner, the draper, addressing himself to 
 me at this moment, informed me that I had a great deal. 
 Supposing I could not be possessed of such a treasure 
 without knowing it, I ventured my first assertion by say- 
 ing that if I had any I was utterly at a loss to imagine 
 where it could be or wherein it consisted. Thus ended the 
 conference. Mr. Grenville squeezed me by the hand again, 
 kissed the ladies, and withdrew. He kissed likewise the 
 maid in the kitchen, and seemed upon the whole a most 
 loving, kissing, kind-hearted gentleman. He is very young, 
 genteel, and handsome. He has a pair of very good eyes 
 in his head, which not being sufficient, as it should seem, 
 for the very nice and difficult purposes of a senator, he has 
 a third also, which he wore suspended by a riband from 
 his buttonhole. The boys hallooed, the dogs barked, 
 " Puss " scampered, the hero, with his long train of obse- 
 quious followers, withdrew. We made ourselves very merry 
 with the adventure, and in a short time settled into our 
 former tranquillity, never probably to be thus interrupted 
 more. 
 
 But that wooing the electors in the old, old times 
 before the era of Parliamentary reform was not always 
 so simple and so idyllic as William W. Grenville found
 
 8 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 it, is shown in the famous contest for Westminster, in 
 that same General Election of 1784, between diaries 
 James Fox and Sir Cecil Wray. It was at this election 
 that the beautiful Georgina, Duchess of Devonshire, 
 successfully wooed the electors for the great Whig 
 leader by her smiles and her kisses. " Your eyes are so 
 bright, my lady, that I could light my pipe by them," 
 said an Irish labourer to her at Co vent Garden. She is 
 said to have valued that compliment more highly than 
 any she received during a long and brilliant career in 
 social and political life. " The Duchess having purchased 
 the vote of an impracticable butcher by a kiss is said to 
 be unquestionable,"" says Earl Stanhope in his " Life of 
 William Pitt." Lord Cornwallis wrote under date 
 April 19, 1784 : " The Duchess of Devonshire is in- 
 defatigable in her canvass for Fox. She was in the 
 most blackguard houses in Long Acre by eight oVlock 
 this morning"; and Horace Walpole has recorded, 
 "During her canvass the Duchess made no scruple of 
 visiting the humblest of the electors, dazzling and 
 enchanting them by the fascination of her manner, the 
 power of her beauty, and the influence of her high rank, 
 and sometimes carrying off' to the hustings the meanest 
 mechanic in her own carriage."" Other pretty society 
 ladies, such as the Duchess of Portland, Lady Derby, 
 Lady Duncannon, Lady Carlisle, and the three fair 
 Ladies Waldegrave, following the example of the 
 Duchess of Devonshire, also canvassed the electors for 
 Fox. 
 
 The Court party, not to be outdone, put forth a rival 
 bevy of bewitching canvassers on behalf of its candi- 
 date, Sir Cecil Wray. Lady Hobart (afterwards Lady 
 Buckinghamshire) the buxom and good-humoured
 
 WOOING THE ELECTORS 9 
 
 ( 'owslip " of Gillray's pictures energetically entered 
 the field with the popular " Diana of Hatfield " to rally 
 the fortunes of the nominee of George III. Sir 
 Nathaniel Wraxall, who was Solicitor-General in Fox's 
 administration, says in his "Memoirs'" : "An imperfect 
 attempt was made on the hostile side to oppose this 
 new species of warfare by similar captivation, and Lady 
 Salisbury was moved to awake the dying fortunes of 
 the Government candidate, but the effort failed ; it 
 wa; imitation ; it was too late, and the Duchess was 
 six-and-tweuty, and Lady Salisbury thirty-four. These 
 are reasons enough, and more than enough, for the 
 rejection of any man from the hustings." In all cases 
 it was found the voters were already " engaged to the 
 Duchess."" 
 
 Meanwhile the "Hon. Codgie Shufflecard Reynardine" 
 as his opponents styled Fox had many rough and 
 coarse encounters with electors, as was the way of the 
 age. He applied to a saddler in the Haymarket for 
 his vote and interest. The saddler declared that to 
 give his vote was out of his power, but he had some- 
 thing instead, with which he was ready to oblige the 
 candidate, and thereupon produced a halter. "My 
 friend," replied Fox, with bland graciousness, " I return 
 you thanks, but I should be sorry to deprive you of it, 
 as I presume it must be a family heirloom."" 
 
 Another story goes that one of the candidate's agents 
 said, " I'll lay you five guineas and stake the money in 
 your own hands that you will not vote for Fox," to a 
 voter who seemed inclined to go the other way. 
 " Done," said the free and independent, and going 
 straight to the booths he won his bet and his bribe. 
 
 The election, which lasted forty-seven days, from
 
 10 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 the 1st of April to the 17th of May, and was marked 
 by scenes of riot and drunkenness business having 
 had to be practically suspended in the constituency 
 resulted in the return of Fox by a majority of two 
 hundred and sixty-six above Wray. But it is worth 
 noting as an illustration of another side of the "humours'" 
 of General Elections in the old days, that the returning 
 officer, who was a rabid Tory, refused to make a return 
 of the election, though the voting was open, on the 
 ground that a scrutiny was necessary. The scrutiny 
 occupied more than a year and cost \ 8,000. Mean- 
 time Fox had found another seat at Kirk wall. 
 
 It speaks badly for the political morality of our 
 forefathers that most of the good stories of the 
 way electors were wooed in old times tell of bribery 
 and corruption. Constituencies with one, five or ten 
 electors were then as common as constituencies with 
 20,000 or 30,000 voters are common now. Indeed, in 
 the early part of this century 350 members, much more 
 than half the House of Commons, were returned by 
 180 individuals. In most of the boroughs, the candi- 
 date simply paid his way to the House of Commons. 
 He sent a fat purse to the patron of the borough, or if 
 it had no patron, to its ten or twentv electors. That 
 was all. There was no wooing to be done. At 
 times the candidate was saved the trouble of showing 
 himself in the constituency, and an old pauper was 
 on the declaration of the poll chaired round the 
 town pro formd. Indeed, in some cases, the candidate 
 had to enter into an engagement with the patron of a 
 nomination borough not to make the acquaintance of 
 his constituents. "I came into Parliament for New town 
 in the Isle of Wight, a borough of Sir Leonard
 
 WOOING THE ELECTORS 11 
 
 Holmes," wrote Lord Falmerston in his diary, May, 
 1807. " One condition required was that I would never, 
 even for the election, set foot in the place, so jealous 
 was the patron lest any attempt should be made to get 
 a new interest in the borough." 
 
 Some of these boroughs having two seats were worth 
 3000 a year or 1500 per seat per annum to their 
 patrons or their electors. If the patron of a nomination 
 borough was a rich territorial magnate or a great peer 
 he gave the seat to a clever, but needy man, who in- 
 creased the political influence of his patron while he 
 made his own reputation in the House of Commons. 
 But many patrons who were not wealthy or had no 
 political ambition, openly sold their boroughs; while, 
 in the case of boroughs independent of patrons, the 
 seat was often put up for public auction, and the 
 purchase money distributed amongst the ten, twenty? 
 or thirty voters who formed the electorate. Yet it is 
 curious to read that these boroughs were, in the existing 
 state of the law of Parliamentary election, deemed 
 blessings to be thankful for; that they were, in fact, 
 regarded as the very strongholds of patriotism and 
 freedom, by the purest and most enlightened of the 
 public men of the time. Sir Samuel Romilly (famous 
 for his efforts in Parliament to limit capital punish- 
 ment to a few heinous offences), bought his seat for 
 Horsham of the Duke of Norfolk for 2000, and writing 
 in his diary in 1817, thus moralises : 
 
 This buying of seats is detestable, and yet it is almost 
 the only way in which one in my situation, who is resolved 
 to be an independent man, can get into Parliament. To 
 come in by a popular election in the present state of the 
 representation is quite impossible ; to be placed there by
 
 12 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 some great lord and to vote as he shall direct is to be in a 
 state of complete dependence ; and nothing hardly remains 
 but to own a seat to the sacrifice of a part of one's fortune. 
 
 Sir Samuel Itomilly, however, goes on to present 
 another side to the picture. He writes : 
 
 It is true that many men who buy seats do it as a matter 
 of pecuniary speculation as a profitable way of employing 
 their money. They carry on a political trade : they buy 
 their seats and sell their votes. 
 
 Another curious use to which boroughs were put was 
 to supply the Government not only with supporters 
 but with funds to carry on contested elections in consti- 
 tuencies where the franchise was more extended. Lord 
 Palmerston, writing in his diary of the General Election 
 of 1807, thus describes this ingenious procedure on the 
 part of the Tory Ministers of the time : 
 
 They purchased seats from their friends at a low price, 
 making up the deficiency probably by appointments and pro- 
 motions. Those seats they afterwards sold out at the average 
 market price to men who promised their support, and with 
 the difference they carried on their contested elections. 
 The sum raised in this manner was stated by a person who 
 was in the secret to be inconceivably great, and accounts 
 for the assertion afterwards made by Lord Granville in the 
 Lords that "not one guinea of public money had been 
 spent in the election." It may be imagined that if seats 
 were bought for .2500, or even 2000, and sold again for 
 <5000, a comparatively small number of such transactions 
 would furnish a considerable fund, and the Government 
 had so many seats passing through their hands that at 
 least in one or two instances they sold them to people
 
 WOOING THE ELECTORS 13 
 
 who only professed themselves in general well disposed 
 towards them without exacting a pledge of unconditional 
 support. 
 
 It was common also for a fond parent, the owner 
 of a nomination borough, to settle it on his daughter 
 as her dowry on marriage. Indeed, so much was 
 the sale of the representation regarded as a "vested 
 interest," that when the Reform Act of 1832, which 
 destroyed these pocket boroughs, was passing through 
 Parliament, a proposal was actually made that their 
 proprietors should receive compensation from the State 
 at the rate of twenty years" purchase. The proposal 
 was then rejected ; but when the Union between Ireland 
 and Great Britain was carried in 1800 the owners of 
 the " rotten boroughs " which were destroyed by the Act 
 were liberally compensated. 
 
 But while the purchase of pocket boroughs from their 
 patrons continued to be recognised as legitimate until 
 their abolition by the Reform Act of 1832, a statute to 
 restrain and punish bribery of voters at elections was 
 passed in the reign of George III. It was, however, 
 ineffectual. Bribery went on as openly and as flagrantly 
 as ever. Even George III. himself spent enormous 
 sums to secure the return of members favourable to the 
 policy to which he so pertinaciously adhered during his 
 long reign the policy of establishing " personal rule," 
 of having as Ministers mere administrative puppets, 
 servile men who would subordinate their opinions and 
 their policy in all things entirely to his own autocratic 
 will. "If the Duke of Northumberland requires some 
 gold pills for the election, it would be wrong not to 
 satisfy him," wrote the King to the Premier, Lord 
 North, in 1779. The " gold pills " came from the " war
 
 14 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 chest"" of the Civil List. Three years later we find 
 the King complaining to Lord North of the great ex- 
 pense which elections were costing him. " Had I 
 thought,"" wrote Lord North in reply, "that the expense 
 of contesting elections in 1779, 1780 and 1781 would 
 have amounted to 72,000, I would never have advised 
 your Majesty to embark. on such expenditure.' 11 
 
 Even the purest and most public spirited of candi- 
 dates for Parliament had to aid their wooing by a lavish 
 expenditure of money. It is curious to read nowadays 
 that Samuel Wilberforce, the great champion of the 
 freedom of the slaves, paid 9000 for Hull, which he 
 first represented in Parliament. " By long established 
 custom,"" he writes in his " Memoirs," " the single vote 
 of a resident elector was rewarded by a donation of t\v<> 
 guineas, four were paid for a plumper, and the expenses 
 of a freeman's journey from London averaged X J 10 apieec. 
 The letter of the law was not broken, because the 
 money was not paid until the last day on which election 
 petitions could be presented." The experience of the 
 Earl of Shaftesbury (the great philanthropist and friend 
 of the working-classes) w r as similar. As Lord Ashley 
 he contested the County of Dorset as an anti-Reform 
 candidate in the General Election of 1831, which fol- 
 lowed on the rejection of the first Reform Bill. He 
 was defeated ; but his expenses amounted to ^15,600, of 
 which the greater portion, a sum of \ 2,525, was paid 
 to the owners of inns and public-houses for refresh- 
 ments i.e., " free drinks " to the people. 
 
 Many cunning and whimsical methods were employed 
 by candidates and their agents to give bribes to voters 
 and yet to be able to swear, in the event of a petition, 
 that they had not infringed the letter of the law. It
 
 \\OOIXG THE ELECTORS 15 
 
 was, for instance, proved at the hearing of an election 
 petition in 1833 that one of the "free and independent," 
 who had a financial difficulty in making up his mind 
 how to vote, entered the committee room of a candidate 
 to see the agent. " How are you to-day, Mr. Brown ? " 
 asked the agent, holding up three of his fingers. " I'm 
 not well at all,"" replied the voter. The agent then put 
 up five fingers, and remarked, " I'm sorry you are not 
 well to-day."" "Oh, 111 be all right soon," said the 
 voter, as he walked to the window. The agent then 
 put five guineas on the table, and turned away, and the 
 elector, picking up the money, disappeared without 
 another word. At the trial, the agent positively swore 
 no communication passed between him and the voter on 
 the subject of payment for the vote, that he did not 
 give the voter five guineas, and the voter protested as 
 stoutly that he had not received them. Indeed, the 
 poetic figments by which bribes were administered in 
 those days, while both parties in the shady transaction 
 managed to keep on the safe side of the rather loose 
 law that was supposed to restrain corruption at Parlia- 
 mentary elections, are of a number and variety that do 
 excellent credit to the inventiveness of our forefathers, 
 if they somewhat sadly tarnish their moral reputation. 
 During some elections a mysterious person arrived on 
 the scene with a plentiful supply of cash. At one place 
 the cashier was known as " Punch," at another he was 
 graphically described as " the Man in the Moon," as he 
 appeared at nightfall. and was, as a watchword, met with 
 the inquiry, " What news from the moon ? " " Good 
 news," was the invariable response. " I bring you what's 
 due to you,"' and the jingling of the guineas fell like 
 music on the ears of the elector. 

 
 16 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Other well-recognised forms of wooing the electors 
 in vogue till the passing of the stringent Corrupt 
 Practices Acts now in operation, were that candidates 
 purchased all sorts of articles from voters at extra- 
 vagant prices, and sold valuable commodities to them 
 for the smallest coins of the realm. At an election at 
 Sudbury in 1826, a candidate purchased from a green- 
 grocer, who had a vote in the constituency, two 
 cabbages for <10, and a plate of gooseberries for 25. 
 He paid the butcher, the grocer, the baker, the tailor, 
 the printer, the bill-sticker on equally liberal terms. 
 At Great Marlow once an elector got a sow and nine 
 young pigs for a penny. Brinsley Sheridan was so 
 fond of peas during his successful contest of Stafford at 
 the General Election of 1784 that he bought them at 
 2 12*. 6d. per quart. A candidate in those days besides 
 buying from tradesmen stocks of domestic necessaries on 
 a Gargantuan scale, also developed extremely curious 
 and costly hobbies for collecting birds, animals and 
 articles of all kinds from the electors, during his house to 
 house canvass. John Stirling, in his burlesque epic of 
 "The Election," pictures the candidate seeking to enlist 
 sympathy for his cause by every artful cajolement : 
 
 By ready speech and now by flattery soft, 
 Sometimes by gifts and promised favours oft, 
 He prospered well, and many a purchase made, 
 Tliat helped at once the cause and quickened trade. 
 A stuffed jackdaw upon an upper shelf 
 Now caught his fancy, now a cup of delft ; 
 He paid three pounds for each. A cat that tore 
 Hisjingers cost him ten ; a rabbit more. 
 
 Most of the voters had old almanacs, of which the
 
 WOOING THE ELECTORS 17 
 
 canvasser Irecame an enthusiastic collector, at several 
 pounds a copy, and their children's white mice were 
 purchased bv hundreds. Among other choice varieties 
 
 A bishop's wont-out ring, an infant's caul, 
 Jl'rrc paid for down, and sent to Harrow Hall. 
 
 A good election cry, brief and pithy, compressing a 
 political creed into a few words and intelligible to the 
 people who have to shout it, is also a great factor 
 in the wooing of the electors. Recent party cries, 
 " Home Rule, 1 ' 1 " Down with the Lords,"" and " One 
 man, one vote," with their rival watchwords, "The 
 T'nion, 11 "One Constitution," "One vote, one value "have 
 these merits. The party cries of bygone times were 
 equally understandable and short, sharp and decisive. 
 There could be no difficulty as to the meaning of the 
 cries of " Free Trade "" and " Cheap Bread, 11 on the one 
 side, and of "Protection"" and "British Agriculture 11 
 on the other side, which involved a laborious exercise of 
 lungs in shouting them during the anti -Corn Law agita- 
 tion half a century ago. At an earlier period, in the 
 era of the Reform agitation, dire was the din in the 
 land about " Vested Rights, 11 "The Throne in Danger, 11 
 "The British Constitution 1 ' vociferations which were 
 met with shouts of " Reform for Ever, 11 " Down with 
 the Rotten Boroughs, 11 " The Bill, the whole Bill, and 
 nothing but the Bill, 11 and again in- all these election 
 cries were pithily put the political opinions of those 
 who yelled them, or, perhaps it would be more correct 
 to say, of those who paid to have them shouted. For 
 the only really confusing election cry on record we 
 must go back to the reign of George II. It dealt not 
 with Toryism or Whiggery, or with things social or
 
 18 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 political. Its origin was astronomical, and had reference 
 to the annual revolution of the earth round the sun. 
 Down to the year 1752, the Julian Calendar or Old 
 Style was in use in England in preference to the more 
 correct Gregorian Calendar or New Style adopted by 
 most of the other nations of Europe. This made our 
 reckoning of time eleven days behind that of the 
 Continent, as corrected by the great movements of the 
 heavenly bodies. Hence to harmonise British time 
 with natural time and Continental usage, it became 
 necessary to throw eleven days out of the year 1752, and 
 so by Act of Parliament it was provided " that the 
 natural day next immediately following the 2nd of 
 September 1752 shall be called and reckoned as the 
 14th day of September, omitting the eleven intermediate 
 nominal days of the common calendar. 1 ' 1 Numbers of 
 people were sorely perplexed by the change. They 
 could not understand it at all. It was the 2nd of 
 September at night, when they went to bed, and the 
 next morning it was the 14th ! Many persons whose 
 term of life dated from any one of the omitted nominal 
 days, say September 10, and who had been accustomed 
 to observe it as a festival, had that year no birthday to 
 keep, for there was no September 10. Among the 
 lower classes the impression was pretty general that by 
 some occult art, and for some sinister purpose the 
 Government had defrauded them of the due number 
 of their days, and that they were actually eleven days 
 nearer the day of death than they ought to have been. 
 Hence at the following elections, Government candi- 
 dates were angrily assaulted by the mobs, and loud 
 were the shouts, " Give us back the eleven days we were 
 robbed of."
 
 WOOING THE ELECTORS 19 
 
 One of the most curious of the things made manifest 
 by a General Election is the confusion which exists in 
 regard to party colours. Most people imagine that 
 each party has got its own special and distinctive colour, 
 and that that colour is worn by its adherents during 
 election contests, in all parts of the country. Nothing 
 could be further from the fact. In times when parties 
 were more sharply defined than they are now ; when it 
 was easier to symbolise party creeds and to convey 
 definite political ideas by means of colour than it has 
 been in recent years, which have witnessed much shifting 
 and changing of parties, blue and buff served as a rule 
 to distinguish the Tory and the Whig, the two great 
 historical parties in the State ; but in our times, when 
 party questions have got rather perplexingly mixed up, 
 those colours are worn indiscriminately, both separately 
 and in combination, by Liberals and Conservatives. In 
 some counties the Liberals are blue and the Conserva- 
 tives buff; in other counties the Conservatives are blue 
 and the Liberals buff. Again in some districts the 
 Liberals flaunt blue and buff in combination ; the Con- 
 servatives in those districts being blue ; in other places 
 the blue and buff ensign is hoisted in the Conservative 
 interest, while the Liberals display blue or buff, and 
 there are counties even in which blue is sported by 
 Liberals and Conservatives alike. 
 
 Blue has been from time immemorial associated in 
 the popular mind with truth and fidelity, which probably 
 explains why each party would fain monopolise it as 
 their own particular colour to signify their constancy to 
 principles. Taking the country as a whole, however, 
 blue is more associated with the Conservative party 
 than with the Liberal party. A " True Blue " one who
 
 20 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 will not change his principles on any consideration has 
 long been used, appropriately enough, perhaps, as a 
 description of a sound Tory or Conservative. But there 
 were always exceptions to the rule. In old electioneering 
 squibs such terms as "a Blue Whig," and "a Whig of 
 the Bluest Blue " are met with occasionally. Charles 
 James Fox was wont to wear a yellow waistcoat, a blue 
 coat and brass buttons, and therefore buff' and blue were 
 adopted by his followers as their colours. Buff and 
 blue are also the colours that the Whig Edinburgh 
 Review permanently adopted for its wrapper. They 
 were the colours of the Prince of Orange ; but, apart 
 from that, the combination of the original Tory blue 
 with the Whig buff must have been suggested by the 
 objection of the Whigs to seeing blue with all its 
 prestige and significance .monopolised by the opposite 
 party. 
 
 Some confusion in party colours seems, indeed, to 
 have always prevailed. Thus, while yellow or buff is in 
 Ireland the colour of the Orange Society, and is con- 
 sequently regarded as the anti-Catholic hue, the anti- 
 Catholics during the Gordon riots of 3780 wore blue 
 ribbons. Lord George Gordon appearing on one occa- 
 sion in the House of Commons with a blue cockade in 
 his hat, Colonel Herbert sprang to his feet and said he 
 would not stay in the House while a member wore the 
 " badge of sedition." The leader of the anti-Catholics 
 was accordingly ordered by the Speaker to put his 
 cockade into his pocket. Again, the English adherents of 
 the movement for Catholic emancipation in the ''Twenties 
 wore orange ribbons as their distinguishing badge, while 
 its most bitter and determined opponents in Ireland 
 displayed the same colour. But in Ireland the vagaries
 
 WOOING THE ELECTORS 21 
 
 as to party colours, which exist to so confusing a degree 
 in the rest of the kingdom, are not to be found. There 
 each party, North and South, has its own distinctive 
 hue. Green is everywhere in Ireland the colour of 
 the Nationalists, and yellow is everywhere the colour of 
 the Orangemen. Orange and blue were, as I have 
 said, the colours of William III., and these were 
 adopted by the Orangemen ; but blue has gradually 
 been discarded by them, and that colour is onlv 
 used now in Ireland by moderate Conservatives who 
 do not care to identify themselves so closely with 
 Orangeism as to wear its colours. But though orange 
 and blue were the colours of William III., sprigs of 
 green were, curiously enough, worn by his soldiers in 
 their hats to distinguish them from the adherents of the 
 Stuart cause who wore the white badge of the King of 
 France at the Battle of the Boyne, which broke the 
 back of that cause and the cause of the Catholic or 
 Nationalist Irish in 1690. 
 
 It is interesting to note, as showing that blue was 
 everywhere the coveted colour in popular movements 
 long before the days of Whigs and Tories, that in 1690, 
 and for many years previously and subsequently, blue 
 was the colour of the Catholic and old Celtic Irish. It 
 was not until the Revolutionary Society of the United 
 Irishmen, about 1790, tried to form a union of Catholics 
 and Protestants, or of the native Irish and of the 
 descendants of the English and Scotch settlers, as a step 
 towards the establishment of an Irish Republic, that 
 green produced by a blending of blue and orange 
 was adopted as the Irish national colour, which it has 
 since remained. 
 
 A colour or badge which party sentiment has made
 
 22 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 almost a holy and sacred thing would, it will be 
 admitted, be a potent factor in a General Election. 
 People like to label themselves, to be able to wear some 
 favour pretty in itself which will distinguish them from 
 others ; and if at the same time it be a badge with which 
 some aspiration, or the memory of some great and com- 
 manding personality, has become associated, it is certain 
 that the contagion of wearing it will spread, and that it 
 will bring over to the cause it represents more adherents 
 than perhaps any number of sound and logical speeches 
 delivered in Parliament. Hence the popularity of 
 " Primrose Day," in memory of Lord Beaconsfield. 
 There is also "Ivy Day,"" October 6 (the anniversary 
 of Mr. ParnelPs death), on which the followers of " the 
 dead chief" wear sprigs of ivy to signify their devotion 
 to his memory and principles ; and the blue cornflower 
 has, with a pretty signification, come to be associated, 
 to some extent at least, with the memory of Cobden 
 and the repeal of the Corn I^aws. But strong and 
 enduring sentiments such as cluster round the Beacons- 
 field and Parnell anniversaries are impossible in the 
 case of party colours when each party is divided on 
 the question of its own particular hue ; and it might, 
 indeed, be well if a joint committee of both parties 
 were formed to reduce the chaos of election colours to 
 order. 
 
 At the same time, it must not be forgotten that, 
 strange though it may seem, the distribution of 
 cockades or ribbons in a constituency during an election 
 on behalf of a candidate is illegal. "No payment," 
 says the sixteenth clause of the Corrupt and Illegal 
 Practices Prevention Act, "or contract for payment, 
 shall, for the purpose of promoting or procuring the
 
 WOOING THE ELECTORS 23 
 
 election of a candidate at any election, be made on 
 account of bands of music, torches, flags, banners, 
 cockades, ribbons, or other marks of distinction.'" But, 
 nevertheless, by the expedient of the local party organi- 
 sations paving the expenses, flags, banners, bands, and 
 cockades still lend colour and animation to the wooing 
 of the electors.
 
 CHAPTER II 
 AT THE POLLING BOOTHS 
 
 PARLIAMENT is dissolved by a Proclamation, issued by 
 the Sovereign, on the advice of the Ministers of the 
 day, and the same instrument also directs the election 
 of its successor. The Lord Chancellor of Great Britain 
 and the Lord Chancellor of Ireland are commanded by 
 the Proclamation to " forthwith serve out writs in due 
 form and according to law, for calling a new Parlia- 
 ment." The writs are despatched from the Crown 
 Office at Westminster, to the returning officers of the 
 various constituencies, on the day that Parliament is 
 dissolved. The messenger of the Crown Office delivers 
 the writs for the provincial constituencies to the Post- 
 master-General or his deputy, at the General Post Office, 
 London, and receives an acknowledgment in writing, 
 stating the time of delivery at St. MartinVle-Grand. 
 The writs for the London divisions are sent by hand 
 from the Crown Office to the returning officers. The 
 local postmasters are instructed by the Postmaster- 
 General to deliver the writs sent through the post 
 without delay, and to obtain in each case a receipt from 
 the returning officer, with an endorsement of the time 
 of the delivery of the writ. These receipts are sent 
 back by the next post to the Postmaster-General, who 
 files them and makes an entry of their particulars in a
 
 AT THE POLLING BOOTHS 
 
 book which is kept at St. MartinVle-Grand for the 
 inspection of persons interested. The writs, it is in- 
 teresting to note, must be despatched from the General 
 Post Office free of charge. 
 
 The form of the writ for boroughs, which is similar 
 to the writ for counties, is as follows : 
 
 Victoria, by the grace of God, of the United Kingdom of 
 Great Britain and Ireland, Queen, Defender of the Faith, 
 to the Mayor of the Borough of greeting : 
 
 Whereas by the advice of Our Council we have ordered a 
 Parliament to be holden at Westminster on the 
 day of next : We command you that notice of the 
 
 time and place of -election being first duly given, you do 
 cause election to be made according to law of members 
 (or a member) to serve in Parliament for the said borough, 
 and that you do cause the name of such members, when so 
 elected, whether they be present or absent, to be certified 
 to us in Chancery without delay. 
 
 Witness Ourselves at Westminster the day 
 
 of , in the year of our reign and in the 
 
 year of our Lord 1 8 
 
 The writ is not written, but printed on parchment, 
 and is about twelve inches by eight in size. Nothing 
 except the dates and particulars necessary for different 
 constituencies is inserted in writing. In the space on 
 the left hand side is the Great Seal, on the right, the 
 printed signature of the Clerk of the Crown. On the 
 back of the writ the returning officer enters the date 
 he receives it, and when the election is complete, certifies 
 the name of the member who is returned. It is then 
 transmitted through the post, with the same precautions 
 as heretofore, to the Clerk of the Crown at Westminster. 
 
 In England, the returning officer is the sheriff for
 
 26 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 the counties, and the mayor for the boroughs. In 
 Scotland and Ireland the sheriffs act for both the 
 counties and the boroughs. In the case of borough 
 elections, not less than two clear days, and not more 
 than three clear days, must elapse between the receipt 
 of the writ and the date of the nomination, and the 
 poll must be taken not later than three clear days after 
 the nomination. The limit of time for the county 
 elections is naturally much wider. In the counties the 
 nomination, may, in the discretion of the sheriff, take 
 place any time up to the ninth day after the receipt of 
 the writ, and the election may be postponed until six 
 clear days after the nomination. 
 
 On the day of nomination the returning officer 
 attends at the place he has duly announced usually 
 the vestry hall or municipal buildings of a borough or 
 of the principal town of a county constituency to 
 receive within certain fixed hours, nomination papers on 
 behalf of candidates. The nomination paper contains 
 the name, abode, profession or calling of the candidate, 
 and the names and addresses of two registered electors 
 who formally propose and second him, and of eight 
 assenting burgesses. As a rule each candidate gives in 
 several nomination papers, filled up by electors from 
 various classes or sections of the constituency in order 
 to show the representative character of his supporters, 
 and at the same time to obviate the risk of having the 
 nomination declared null and void by the returning 
 officer owing to an informality or an irregularity in 
 the original nomination paper. It is the duty of the 
 returning officer to refuse to receive the nomination 
 of any candidate disqualified by statute. A peer of the 
 United Kingdom, in other words a member of the
 
 AT THE POLLING BOOTHS 27 
 
 House of Lords, cannot be a candidate for the House 
 of Commons. A Scottish peer, even though he be not 
 one of the sixteen elected representative peers of 
 Scotland who have seats in the House of Lords, is also 
 disqualified, but by the Act of Union of Great Britain 
 and Ireland, an Irish peer so long as he is not one of 
 the twenty-eight elected representatives of the Irish 
 peerage in the House of Lords may sit for any county 
 or borough in Great Britain. It was a matter of doubt 
 whether a clergyman could sit in the House of Com- 
 mons until 1801, when the question was raised by the 
 return of the Rev. J. Home Tooke, the famous Radical, 
 for the borough of Old Sarum. A motion to expel 
 him from the House was dropped, but, while he Avas 
 allowed to retain his seat, an Act was passed to prevent, 
 in future, the admission of clergymen of the Established 
 Church, and ministers of the Church of Scotland. The 
 priests of the Roman Catholic Church were also dis- 
 qualified by the Catholic Emancipation Act of 1829. 
 English, Irish, and Scotch judges, county court judges, 
 stipendiary police magistrates, revising banisters, cer- 
 tain State officers, civil servants and Government con- 
 tractors, are also excluded from the House of Commons. 
 A recorder cannot sit for a borough in which he acts as 
 judge. Imbecility of mind and lack of British citizenship 
 are other disqualifications. Foreigners, although they 
 may own property in this country, and have lived here 
 nearly all their lives, cannot vote unless they have 
 taken out letters of naturalisation at the Home Office, 
 AYhitehall, for which the fee is 5. An adjudged 
 bankrupt is disabled from being elected to, or sitting 
 or voting in, the House of Commons, but the dis- 
 qualification ceases when he obtains his discharge with
 
 28 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 a certificate that the bankruptcy was caused by mis- 
 fortune. A convicted felon, who has not served 
 his full term of punishment, or has not received the 
 royal pardon, is disqualified. Four Irish political felons 
 have been nominated and returned for Irish con- 
 stituencies within the last quarter of a century, but 
 their elections were subsequently declared to be null 
 and void by the House of Commons. O'Donovan 
 Rossa, elected for county Tipperary in 1870, while 
 undergoing a sentence for treason felony ; John Mitchel, 
 who escaped in 1853 from the penal settlement of Van 
 Diemen's Land, elected for county Tipperary in 1875 ; 
 Michael Davitt, elected for Meath in 1882 while out on 
 ticket-of-leave ; and John Daly, returned for the city 
 of Limerick in 1895, while in prison for treason felony, 
 were all declared by resolution of the House of Commons 
 to " have become, and to continue incapable of being 
 elected or returned to this House, having been adjudged 
 guilty of felony."" Mr. Michael Davitt, however, on 
 the termination of the period of his sentence, became 
 eligible for election, and was returned to the House of 
 Commons in 1892 and 1895. 
 
 Any male over twenty-one years of age may other- 
 wise be nominated. Under the Constitution of the 
 United States, every member of both the House of 
 Representatives and the Senate must be an inhabitant 
 of the State for which he is returned. But no such rule 
 exists in our Constitution. A statute of Henry VI. 
 required the member to be a resident of the county or 
 borough which he represented in Parliament ; but by 
 the time of Elizabeth it had fallen into desuetude, and 
 finally was repealed by an Act of George III. By a law 
 also passed in the reign of Henry VI. the county member
 
 AT THE POLLING BOOTHS 29 
 
 was required to have an estate of 600 in land. The 
 object of this enactment was to secure to the owners of 
 land a monopoly of the representation of the counties 
 in the House of Commons. No property quali- 
 fication was then required of the representatives of 
 boroughs, much to the displeasure of the country 
 gentlemen who desired to safeguard their ascendancy by 
 excluding the rest of the community from Parliament ; 
 and at last, after several defeats, they succeeded in 
 having passed into a law, during the reign of Queen 
 Anne, a Bill requiring every member of the Commons, 
 except the representatives of the Universities, to possess, 
 as a qualification for his seat, a landed estate, above all 
 encumbrance, of 200 a year. The law was, however, 
 notoriously evaded. Candidates sometimes presented 
 themselves without any qualification, which, on their 
 return, their supporters provided for them, subject to a 
 certain control of the property. The rise of rich com- 
 mercial men, ambitious of seats in Parliament, led, early 
 in the present century, to the surrender of the real 
 estate qualification, and candidates were enabled to 
 qualify either in respect of realty or personalty, or both 
 combined. All property qualifications for Parliament 
 were abolished by statute in 1858. The aspirant for 
 Parliamentary honours must, however, have money in 
 his purse. The heavy charges of the returning officer 
 are defrayed by the candidates. If there be no contest 
 the candidate on nomination pays 25. In the event 
 of a contest the charges are considerably higher. They 
 run in boroughs from 100 up to 700, and in counties 
 from 150 to 1000, according to the number of 
 electors on the register, and are apportioned equally 
 among the candidates. 

 
 30 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 How ridiculously easy it must have been to ascertain 
 the verdict of the electorate in some of the old pocket 
 boroughs ! In the famous borough of Old Sarum, 
 Wilts for many years a mere assemblage of mounds, 
 trenches, and ruins about a mile distant from the pre- 
 sent cathedral city of Salisbury the electorate consisted 
 simply of the bailiff of the Earl of Caledon. 
 
 The Rev. J. Mozley, in his " Reminiscences," gives a 
 most interesting portrait of the constituency of Old 
 Sarum. He was conducting a service for a friend at 
 Stratford-cum-Castle, near Salisbury, when he met " a 
 bright looking old fellow, with a full rubicund face and 
 a profusion of white hair." Having expressed his warm 
 approval of the service as conducted by Mr. Mo/ley, the 
 old man went on to say : " When people had nothing 
 else to do, they could not do better than say prayers. 
 For his part his work was over, and he was proud of it. 
 He had been the borough of Old Sarum, and had re- 
 turned two representatives to Parliament for forty years. 
 All honest men and gentlemen not the sort of fellows 
 they were sending to Parliament in these days." In 
 the borough of Sutton, in Surrey now a beautiful rural 
 domain seen from the London and Brighton Railway 
 the right of election was . in freeholders having their 
 freeholds in their own occupation. Sir Mark Wood, 
 having purchased the entire borough for 1 0,000, 
 became the sole freeholder. In the borough there were 
 but six houses. Sir Mark lived in one, and let the 
 others to weekly tenants, who paid the taxes, he being 
 the collector, churchwarden, overseer, surveyor of high- 
 ways, borough magistrate, and appointer of the local 
 constable. This latter functionary also acted as return- 
 ing officer, and duly returned Sir Mark Wood as
 
 AT THE POLLING BOOTHS 31 
 
 member for the borough, after Sir Mark had proposed 
 himself and demanded a poll. 
 
 Mattel's were managed with equal ease and expedition 
 in the county of Bute, in Scotland. The writ of elec- 
 tion was transmitted to the sheriff, Mr. M'Leod 
 Bannatine, afterwards Lord Bannatine. He named the 
 day of nomination and issued his precept for the elec- 
 tion. On the day of nomination, Mr. Bannatine was 
 the only freeholder qualified to be present. He accord- 
 ingly took the chair and went through all the prescribed 
 forms. As sheriff, he produced the writ of election, 
 read the writ and the oaths against bribery at elections. 
 As sheriff, he administered the oath of allegiance, 
 supremacy and abjuration to himself as chairman. He 
 signed the oaths as chairman and sheriff. As chairman, 
 he named himself as clerk to the meeting, and as clerk, 
 he called over the roll of freeholders which contained 
 only his own name. He then proposed himself as candi- 
 date, seconded his own nomination, and, as there was no 
 opposition, declared himself duly elected. He dictated 
 and signed the minutes of election as chairman, and as 
 sheriff he transmitted the return to the writ to the 
 Crown Office at Westminster. 
 
 An admirable illustration of the nature of the 
 Parliamentary representation of the country at this 
 time is contained in a famous passage in the speech 
 of Lord John Russell explaining the first Reform 
 Bill to the House of Commons, on March 1, 1831. 
 He assumed the case of a stranger who, arriving in 
 England and finding it unequalled in civilisation, in 
 enlightenment, in freedom and in wealth, desired to 
 study the representative institutions of so fortunate a 
 country.
 
 32 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 What would be his surprise [exclaimed Lord John 
 Russell] if he were taken by the guide, whom he had 
 asked to conduct him to one of those places of election, 
 to a green mound, and told that that green mound sent 
 two members to Parliament ? Or to be taken to a stone 
 wall, with three niches in it, and told that those tlmv 
 niches sent two members to Parliament ? Or if he were 
 shown a green park with many signs of flourishing vegetable 
 life, but none of human habitation, and told that that green 
 park sent two members to Parliament ? If the stranger 
 were told all this, and was astonished at hearing it, how 
 much more astonished would he not be if he was taken to 
 see large and populous towns full of enterprise and industry 
 and intelligence,containing vast magazines and every speck's 
 of manufacture, and were to be told that those did not send 
 any representatives to Parliament. 
 
 Sir Robert Harry Inglis, member for the University 
 of Oxford, who vehemently opposed Lord John Russell's 
 motion for leave to introduce the Reform Bill, denied 
 that there was any idea whatever of the representative 
 principle in the Constitution of England. The principle 
 on which Parliament was summoned was, he contended, 
 that the Sovereign invited whomsoever he pleased to 
 advise him in the government of the realm. This was 
 in a constitutional sense true. In olden times the King 
 issued his writ or summons to any place he pleased, 
 commanding that place to send a representative to his 
 Grand Council. The choice of the Sovereign was 
 originally an arbitrary choice, but in time it became in 
 most cases permanent. However, for close on two cen- 
 turies the Sovereign had no control over the composition 
 of the House of Commons save what he could exercise 
 as in the case of George III., through the influence of
 
 AT THE POLLING BOOTHS 33 
 
 the purse, like any of his wealthy subjects, or the distri- 
 bution of places of emolument or titles of honour to those 
 who supported his policy in Parliament. Charles II. 
 was the last Sovereign who by the exercise of the per- 
 sonal prerogative of the Crown issued writs to places 
 previously unrepresented. Therefore, from the middle of 
 the seventeenth century to the Reform Act of 1832 the 
 representation of the country in the House of Commons 
 remained unaltered ; and thus while in the changes of 
 the time many constituencies became mere geographical 
 expressions Old Sarum, in Wilts, was a mound ; Dun- 
 wich, a place on the Suffolk coast, was undermined by 
 the sea ; Sutton, in Surrey, was a park ; Corfe Castle, in 
 Dorsetshire, was a ruin and yet continued to return 
 each its two representatives, great manufacturing towns 
 like Manchester, Liverpool and Leeds, vast centres of 
 industry and wealth, and teeming with population which, 
 owing to the industrial revolutions of the eighteenth 
 century, had arisen since the days of Charles II., were 
 without a voice in the Legislature. 
 
 At the opening of the eighteenth century the House 
 of Commons consisted of 513 members representing 
 England and Wales ; Scotland, after its union with 
 England and Wales, sent 45 members ; and Ireland, on 
 its inclusion in the United Kingdom in 1801, sent 100 
 members. Of the 658 members thus made up, 425 
 were returned either on the nomination or on the 
 recommendation of 252 patrons. This extraordinary 
 representative system " with all its represented ruins 
 and all its unrepresented cities," as Macaulay said was 
 happily destroyed by the Reform Act of 1832. Every 
 borough which had less than 2000 inhabitants lost the 
 right of sending a member to Parliament, and boroughs
 
 34 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 of less than 4000 inhabitants which previously returned 
 two members were each deprived of one representative. 
 The 143 seats thus obtained were distributed amongst 
 the important unrepresented boroughs and the populous 
 counties. England then had 472 members ; Wales, 28 ; 
 Scotland, 53 ; Ireland 105 ; or still a total of 658. The 
 Act also got rid of the existing curious and perplexing 
 borough franchises. There were, for instance, the " pot- 
 wallopers." A potwalloper was a person whose claim to 
 vote was founded on the fact that he had " boiled his 
 own pot"" in the constituency for six months. He 
 might be cither a householder or a lodger so long 
 apparently as he did his own cooking. Then there 
 were the freemen, whose qualification to vote WH;> 
 obtained by birth, by marriage with the daughter or 
 the widow of a freeman, by apprenticeship to a free- 
 man, by purchase, or by gift ; residents who paid " scot 
 and lot, 11 as the taxes for local and national purposes 
 were called; holders of land in the borough, and 
 members of the corporation of the borough. By the 
 Reform Act of 1832 all these franchises, save the 
 freeman's roll, were swept away, and votes were given to 
 householders paying rates for houses of the yearly value 
 of 10 and upwards. In counties the franchise had 
 been much simpler. The right to vote had been 
 enjoyed by forty-shilling freeholders alone for four 
 hundred years, or since 1430, in the reign of Henry VI. 
 By the Reform Act the franchise was extended to 
 copyholders (an ancient tenure of land somewhat of the 
 nature of a freehold) of the value of 10 a year, to 
 leaseholders of not less than twenty-one year:' at I la 
 annual rent of 30 and upwards, and to tenants of 
 holdings of the clear annual value of
 
 AT THE POLLING BOOTHS 35 
 
 Lord John Russell spoke with bated breath of the 
 tremendous results which would flow from the Reform 
 Act of 1832. "Half a million of voters will be added 
 to the electorate of the United Kingdom, 11 said he, and 
 the House was awed by the statement. But, as the 
 result proved, the number was considerably less. The 
 working classes, who really carried the Bill whose 
 fierce and tumultuous agitation stiffened the backs of the 
 reforming Ministry, and overawed the opposing peers 
 and the wavering King were still left entirely outside 
 the pale of the Constitution. The Act simply extended to 
 the middle classes a share of the political power, which 
 had hitherto been the monopoly of the aristocracy. No 
 wonder, then, that the working classes refused to accept 
 ;i;> final the Reform Act of 1832, as they were asked to 
 do by its author, Lord John Russell ; and that from 
 1832 to 1867 they frequently demanded their own 
 enfranchisement. Mr. John Bright, who, after the 
 repeal of the Corn Laws in 1845, became the leader of 
 the second reform agitation, declared about 1860 that 
 five out of every six men in the kingdom had no votes. 
 He also stated that there were in the House of Commons 
 330 members (more than half the House) whose con- 
 stituents combined did not amount to more than 
 180,000, and that there were at the same time 24 
 members whose constituents numbered together upwards 
 of 200,000. The nation had, in fact, again outgrown 
 its Constitution. 
 
 But it was not until 1867 that the second Reform 
 Act was passed. The electors qualified by the franchise 
 established by the first Reform Act numbered in 1867 
 1,364,000. The new Act, introduced by Disraeli, who 
 leader of the House of Commons under a Con-
 
 36 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 servative Government the Act which the Premier, 
 Lord Derby, described in a historic phrase as " a leap in 
 the dark" increased the number of voters to 2,448,000. 
 It established the principle of household suffrage. In 
 boroughs the qualification for the franchise was reduced 
 from the occupancy of a house valued at 10 to the 
 occupancy of any house, provided the occupier was one 
 year in possession, was rated for the relief of the poor, 
 and paid his rates personally. Lodgers paving J.10 a 
 year and resident for twelve months were also for the 
 first time entitled to vote. In counties, however, 
 household suffrage was not yet recognised. The fran- 
 chise vas simply extended to every freeholder whose 
 freehold was of the annual value of 40,v., to every 
 copyholder and leaseholder of the annual value of 
 5, and to every tenant or householder whose rent was 
 not less than i'12 a year. The franchise in Scotland 
 was not dissimilar from that of England ; but in Ireland 
 the borough franchise was only reduced from a J.'10 
 rated occupancy to a X'4 rated occupancy, while in the 
 counties the qualifications established by the Act of 
 1832 were left undisturbed. In connection with the 
 Reform Act of 1867 a Redistribution Act was passed 
 which allowed only one member to boroughs having 
 less than 10,000 inhabitants. England then had 463 
 members; Wales, 30; Scotland, 60; Ireland, 105; or 
 still a total of 658. 
 
 The electorate had reached 3,000,000 when Mr. Glad- 
 stone's Representation of the People Act, 1884 which 
 emended the household franchise to counties, made the 
 qualification to vote in Ireland identical with that in 
 Great Britain, and brought the entire United Kingdom 
 under a uniform electoral law added 2,000,000 voters,
 
 AT THE POLLING BOOTHS :J7 
 
 or more than four times as many as were created by the 
 Act of 1832. The electoral body of the United King- 
 dom now numbers about 6,000,000. Every male over 
 twenty-one years of age who is the inhabitant occupier 
 of a dwelling-house or of any part of a house occupied 
 as a separate dwelling, whether he occupies as owner, as 
 tenant, or by virtue of any office, service, or employ- 
 ment (the question of rent being immaterial) ; and every 
 lodger occupying rooms of a yearly value, if let unfur- 
 nished, of dClO, is entitled to be on the voters 1 register 
 and to vote provided that he has been in occupation for 
 twelve months preceding July 15. There is no con- 
 dition as to rating or payment of rates in the lodgers" 
 franchise, but in the case of the occupancy of a house or 
 part of a house some person (either landlord, rent 
 collector, or tenant) must have paid the poor-rates due 
 in respect of such dwelling-house on or before July 20 
 in England (the date being different in England, Scot- 
 land, and Ireland) or the voter will be disfranchised for 
 the whole of the following year. Persons who have 
 received parochial assistance other than medical relief, 
 aliens, iml)eciles, and peel's are also disqualified from 
 voting at a Parliamentary election. 
 
 In 1884 the House of Commons consisted of 652 
 members, four constituencies returning six representa- 
 tives having been disfranchised since 1867 for corrupt 
 practices at elections ; but by the Redistribution Act, 
 pa>sed in connection with the third Reform Act of 
 1884, not only were 160 seats obtained by disfranchise- 
 ment distributed among counties and boroughs then 
 under-represented, but the total number of members 
 was raised from 652 to 670, England getting six and 
 Scotland twelve more. Boroughs with a population of
 
 38 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 less than 15,000 inhabitants were thrown into their re- 
 spective counties ; boroughs with 15,000 to 50,000 inha- 
 bitants were given one member ; with 50,000 to 165,000, 
 two members ; and beyond that figure an additional 
 member was given for every 50,000 of population. The 
 county representation was based in the same manner upon 
 the number of the inhabitants. The House has since 
 1884 consisted of G70 members 465 from England, 30 
 from Wales, 72 from Scotland, and 103 from Ireland. 
 
 The Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, and Dublin 
 have for centuries enjoyed Parliamentary representation. 
 The Universities of London, Edinburgh and St. An- 
 drews, and Glasgow and Aberdeen were enfranchised by 
 the Reform Acts of 1867-68. There are now in the 
 House of Commons nine members who sit for universities. 
 Oxford returns two ; Cambridge two ; Dublin two ; 
 London one ; Edinburgh and St. Andrews one ; Glasgow 
 and Aberdeen one. The voters are in each case the 
 graduates on the electoral roll of the university. The 
 numbers constantly fluctuate, but Oxford has about 
 6000 votes; Cambridge about 6500; Dublin about 
 4000; Glasgow and Aberdeen, and Edinburgh and St. 
 Andrews have each about 8000. 
 
 The registration of electors, which was first intro- 
 duced by the Reform Act of 1832, is now conducted by 
 the local authorities. The voters 1 lists for each con- 
 stituency are first compiled by the parish overseers in 
 England, the clerks of the unions in Ireland, and the 
 valuation assessors in Scotland, and in August of each 
 year are affixed on the doors of churches, chapels, 
 vestry halls, ,police stations and post offices for public 
 reference. If a qualified elector finds his name omitted 
 from the list or that the list contains a misdescription
 
 At THE POLLING BOOTHS .'59 
 
 of some essential particular, lie must send in notice 
 before a given date. Courts for the revision of these 
 lists, presided over, in England and Ireland, by a 
 barrister-at-law known as the revising barrister, and in 
 Scotland bv the Sheriffs, are held in every constituency 
 in September and October. It is in these Revision 
 Courts that the fate of parties at the polling booths is 
 mainly decided. The entire political complexion of a 
 constituent may be changed by the registration. 
 " Register, register, register," was the advice which Sir 
 Robert Peel gave to his Tory followers in a speech at 
 Tamworth in August 1837, and " Register, register, 
 register," has been since then the motto of both the 
 great political parties. " The battle of the Constitution 
 must be fought in the Registration Courts," 1 said Sir 
 Robert Peel on another occasion. To this important 
 branch of political work the National Conservative 
 Union and the National Liberal Federation give the 
 closest attention through their local representatives. 
 On it vast sums of money are spent. When a stranger 
 comes to reside in a constituency in which parties are 
 highly organised, he is immediately waited on by poli- 
 tical agents to ascertain his opinions, and when he 
 lias got the necessary residential qualification care is 
 taken by the agents of the party to which he belongs 
 that his name appears on the voters 1 list. Each party 
 is also represented in the revision courts by an agent 
 with a band of local assistants, who strive to get on 
 the register as many as possible of their own supporters, 
 and to reduce by every legitimate means the ranks of 
 their opponents. An appeal from a decision of the 
 revising barrister is allowed to one of the High Courts. 
 The revised register conies into operation on
 
 40 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 January 1 of each year, and remains in force until 
 December 31, and according as the register of a con- 
 stituency is Conservative or Liberal so will a Liberal or 
 a Conservative be returned if an election should take 
 place within the twelve months. That is the general 
 rule. There are of course exceptions to it occasionally. 
 A party has, now and then, been overwhelmed by a 
 wave of popular feeling in constituencies where accord- 
 ing to the registers it was in a majority. " Reaction is 
 the ebb and flow of opinion incident to fallible beings," 
 said Disraeli in the House of Commons, February 1848, 
 " the consequence of hope deferred, of false representa- 
 tions, of expectations baulked. Reaction is the conse- 
 quence of a nation waking from its illusions." Besides, 
 for the vagaries of " the wobbler " there is no accounting. 
 " I was born a Conservative on August 29, 1848," said a 
 candidate at the General Election of 1895, and no doubt 
 he was right, for views on political questions are largely 
 due to the temperament or disposition, or the influences 
 of environment. In fact Mr. Gilbert's sentry was not 
 far wrong in saying that every little boy or little gal 
 who's born into the world alive, 
 
 Is either a little Liberal 
 Or else a little Conservative. 
 
 Hut "the wobbler" has somehow no settled political 
 convictions. He occupies a position of immense power. 
 He is the odd man with the casting vote. At each 
 General Election he turns up at the polling booths in 
 his thousands, and votes under the influence of some 
 passing whim or fancy, or, perhaps, with an intensely 
 good-natured desire to give the " outs " a chance. It 
 is to his unstable political opinions that is due the
 
 AT THE POLLING BOOTHS 41 
 
 remarkable and somewhat humorous fact that Liberal 
 has succeeded Conservative in office with invariable regu- 
 larity since the second great extension of the franchise 
 in 1868, by which the social stratum containing the 
 "wobbler" was tapped. The "wobbler"" is a plain, 
 colourless, commonplace person, as a rule, but in him 
 really lies at every General Election the decision of the 
 fateful question Shall the Government of the Empire 
 be Liberal or Conservative for a term of years ? 
 
 The number of polling booths depends on the extent 
 of the constituency. Each station which is kept open 
 from eight in the morning till eight in the evening is 
 presided over by a representative of the returning 
 officer (known as the presiding officer) assisted by his 
 clerks. The interest of each candidate is looked after in 
 the polling booth by a polling personation agent. No 
 one else has authority to remain in the booth. When a 
 voter enters the polling-station, the presiding officer 
 first satisfies himself of his identity, according to the 
 register of voters a duty in which the presiding officer 
 is assisted by the polling-agents of the candidates 
 before he supplies the elector with a voting-paper. The 
 voting- papers are made up like a cheque book. The 
 counterfoil and the voting-paper have both a certain 
 number, like a cheque and its counterfoil ; and before 
 tearing the voting-paper out of the book and handing 
 it to the voter, the presiding officer enters the voter's 
 register number on the counterfoil, and stamps the 
 voting-paper with the official die. Retiring with the 
 voting-paper to a reserved corner of the room, where 
 no one dare approach him, the elector places his 
 mark after the name of the candidate for whom he 
 votes ; then folding up the paper, but leaving the official
 
 4-2 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 stamp exposed that the presiding officer may see it is 
 really the official paper, he drops it into the ballot-box. 
 Thus are votes recorded. Thus does the citizen, humble 
 and obscure, exercise his great constitutional right of 
 the franchise which makes or unmakes the Government 
 of the greatest empire in the world. 
 
 How simple and quiet the operation is compared 
 with the mode of recording votes before the Ballot Act 
 of 1872. Voting was in those days open. The polling- 
 was at one time prolonged for forty days, as we have 
 seen in the case of the Westminster election of 1784. 
 In later years the period was reduced to fifteen days. 
 The Reform Act of 1832 provided that the poll was 
 to be taken in two days. But on the polling days 
 whether forty, fifteen, or two street fights between 
 the followers of the rival candidates were common, if 
 not universal, all over the country. Indeed the first 
 thing a candidate did was to organise a mob of blud- 
 geon men to protect himself and his followers during 
 the campaign, to escort his voters to the poll, and also, 
 of course, to intimidate the enemy. Between them the 
 rival mobs " painted the town red " during the polling. 
 Hustings, or temporary platforms, were erected in front 
 of the building in which the voting was recorded, and here 
 the candidates had to stand for hours every day, each 
 making heroic, but vain, efforts to lay before the rowdy 
 shrieking crowd, amid showers of stones, mud, and dead 
 cats, the sublime virtue of his political opinions, or the 
 utter depravity of the views of his opponent. A 
 common item in a candidate^ election bill before the 
 Ballot Act was something like this : " To the employ- 
 ment of 300 men to obtain a hearing, oP-iGO." Those 
 men believed that the best way " to obtain a hearing "
 
 AT THE POLLING BOOTHS 43 
 
 for their employer was to prevent his rival being heard, 
 and as the hired mob on the other side entertained the 
 same opinion, the result was that both candidates were 
 shouted down. 
 
 A county election in the early years of Parlia- 
 mentary representation was always decided by a show 
 of hands of the people of the county in meeting 
 assembled. Polling came into operation in the i-eign of 
 Henry VI., when the franchise was limited to the fortv 
 shilling freeholders ; but it was not till as late as the 
 reign of James I. that the right of a candidate to have 
 a poll on demand was completely established. While 
 the system of open voting continued, the sheriff or pre- 
 siding officer, on the day of nomination, asked for a 
 show of hands on behalf of each of the candidates, and 
 decided in favour of the candidate on whose behalf the 
 larger number of hands was uplifted. But as the 
 majority of those present were non-voters, of course this 
 farce \\as alwavs followed by a demand for a poll. 
 From time to time, during the davs the poll remained 
 open, figures recording the progress of the candidates 
 were issued on the front of the hustings, and gave the 
 
 O 7 O 
 
 signal for renewed shouting and groaning, and the fall 
 of fresh showers of unsavoury missiles. A graphic and 
 very true picture of electioneering pastimes in front of 
 the hustings is given in the following extract from an 
 old rhyme, entitled "Election Day": 
 
 Xoir greet ing, /tooling, and abuse, 
 To each man's parti/ prove of use ; 
 Anil mnd, and .stones, and waving hats, 
 And broken heads and putrid cats, 
 Are offerings made to aid the cause 
 Of order, government, and lutt's.
 
 44 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Nmv lampoons, idle tales, and jokes, 
 And placards over-reach and hoax ; 
 Whilst blustering, bullying, and browbeating, 
 A little pommelling and maltreating, 
 And elbowing, jostling, and cajoling, 
 And all the jockeuship of polling, 
 Deep manoeuvre and duplicity, 
 Prove all elections fair and free, 
 
 An interesting glimpse of what a candidate had to face 
 on the hustings, and of the manner in which he was 
 compelled to play down to the level of his audience, is 
 afforded by an experience of Disraeli in the Town Hall 
 of Aylesbury once, on returning thanks for his election 
 for Buckinghamshire, which he represented from 1847 
 till his elevation to the peerage in 1870. He was 
 received with a cry of, " You look rather white," from 
 his opponents. 
 
 I can tell you [he exclaimed] that it is at least not the 
 white feather I show. [Laughter and cheers, mixed with 
 howling.] If any member of the melodious company of 
 owls [loud laughter] wishes to address you after me, I hope 
 that you will give him a fair hearing. [Interruption.] I 
 can tell the honourable gentleman who makes this inter- 
 ruption, that if it were possible for him to express the 
 slightest common sense in decent language I should be 
 ready to hear him. In the meantime, I must say from 
 the symptoms of intelligence which he has presented to us 
 to-day I hope he is not one whom I number amongst m\ r 
 supporters. [Cheers and laughter.] 
 
 Addressing his opponents, he further said : 
 
 Your most brilliant argument is a groan, and your hap- 
 piest repartee a hiss. [A voice then exclaimed, " Speak
 
 AT THE POLLING BOOTHS 45 
 
 quick ! speak quick ! " and he retorted :] It is very easy for 
 you to speak quick, when you only utter a stupid mono- 
 syllable ; but when I speak I must measure my words. 
 [Loud cheers and laughter.] I have to open your great 
 thick head. [Laughter.] What I speak is to enlighten 
 you. If I bawl like you, you will leave this place as 
 ignorant as you entered it. [Cheers and laughter.] 
 
 And yet it took forty years to convince Parliament 
 of the Ixmeticence of the Ballot. Mr. Grote, the 
 historian of Greece, who sat in the House of Commons 
 as a Radical for the City of London from 1832 to 
 1841, made the subject his hobby. In 1833, during 
 the first session of the reformed Parliament, he brought 
 in a Bill to provide for secret voting at Parliamentary 
 flections, but it was rejected by a majority of 105, the 
 numbers being 106 for the Bill, and 211 against it. 
 When Mr. Grote retired from Parliament in 1841, to 
 devote himself to his " History of Greece," Mr. Henry 
 Berkeley took up the subject, and, like Mr. Grote, 
 moved an annual motion in its favour ; but failed to 
 get for the Ballot the sanction of a vote of the House 
 of Commons until 1857, when, despite the opposition 
 of the then Whig Government (including Lord John 
 Russell and Mr. Gladstone, who, however, ultimately 
 avowed themselves supporters of the Ballot), he 
 carried, by a majority of 37, a resolution in favour 
 of secret voting at elections. Still twenty-one years 
 elapsed before the Ballot was finally established by 
 Act of Parliament. A Select Committee which sat 
 in 1868, presided over by Lord Ilartington, to inquire 
 into corrupt practices at elections, reported in favour 
 of the Ballot, as a measure likely to conduce to the 
 tranquillity, purity, and freedom of elections. The
 
 46 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 undue influence which prevailed in various forms at 
 elections owing principally to the system of open 
 voting are strikingly set forth in the evidence taken 
 by that Committee. The most common form was 
 the terrorism exercised by the hired mobs at each 
 side, which used as their weapons of persuasion stones 
 and sticks, dead cats, rotten eggs and other mal- 
 odorous weapons, and opprobrious cries. There was 
 also not the less powerful, but more subtle, intimidation 
 of tenants by landlords, of workmen by employers, of 
 .servants by masters, of tradesmen and shopkeepers by 
 customers; and more reprehensible still, the spiritual 
 influence of ministers of religion, who did not hesitate 
 to invoke the terrors of the world to come, in order to 
 compel an elector to vote against his conscience. 
 
 In 1871, Mr. W. E. Forster, who wa.s a member of the 
 Liberal Government then in office, with Mr. Gladstone 
 as Prime Minister, introduced the Ballot Bill. It passed 
 through the House of Commons, but was rejected bv the 
 House of Lords by ninety-seven votes to forty-eight, on 
 the motion, curiously enough, of the Earl of Shaftcs- 
 bury, the great philanthropist and friend of the working 
 classes, for whose protection, indeed, the Bill was mainly 
 designed. The arguments of the opponents of secret 
 voting were, that as the vote was a trust confided to the 
 elector for the good of the commonweal, it was essential, 
 to prevent its being used for private and unworthy 
 ends, that it should be discharged openly and in the 
 light of day ; that the ballot would impair or destroy 
 the voter's sense of dignity and his feeling of public 
 responsibility, by implying that a man dare nut r.\|> 
 his sentiments and discharge hi., duty in the lace of hi.* 
 fellow citizens. But the.-.e academic argument.- could
 
 AT THE POLLING BOOTHS 47 
 
 not prevail. The Bill was reintroduced in the following 
 Session of Parliament, passed again through the Com- 
 mons, was sent up to the Lords, and despite the renewed 
 opposition of Lord Shaftesbury, was carried successfully 
 to the Statute Book. Since then the elector has been 
 free to vote as he pleased, influenced only by the dictates 
 of his conscience, his political convictions, or his whims 
 and fancies. 
 
 But the polling day, on which by an ancient and 
 curious formality all soldiers are confined to barracks, is 
 still the most exciting day of the electoral campaign. 
 Each side devotes all its energies on that momentous 
 day to whipping in the voters. Before the Corrupt 
 Practices Act of 1883, which prohibits the hire of 
 vehicles by candidates, the heaviest item in a candi- 
 date's expenditure was the cost of bringing the electors 
 to the booths. In the General Election of 1880 the 
 last at which the old custom prevailed the items for hire 
 of conveyances were, in North Lancashire, 6135 ; in 
 South Durham, 6536 ; in North Durham, 7330 ; and 
 in Montgomeryshire it reached 7819. In the last- 
 named constituency the unsuccessful candidate spent 
 on vehicles alone 5818, or at the rate of 2 18*. 5d. 
 for each vote cast for him. In some of the boroughs 
 also big sums were spent under this head. For instance, 
 in East Retford vehicular accommodation was provided 
 for the 8000 electors at a cost of 3663. 
 
 In earlier years getting the voters to the poll was 
 sometimes attended by rather unpleasant adventures. 
 Outside electors travelling by land or by water on their 
 way to the scene of a contest frequently found them- 
 otlves belated. Vessels, carrying voters, say from London 
 to Ipswich, somehow lost their reckoning and only dis-
 
 48 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 covered their error upon reaching Amsterdam. Coaches 
 conveying voters broke down mysteriously. Boots and 
 other indispensable articles of clothing belonging to 
 voters travelling to the poll strangely disappeared 
 from hotels during the night. And, indeed, curious 
 things occur on the day of polling even in these 
 prosaic times. A funny incident happened at the elec- 
 tion for the City of Cork in 1895. The contest lay 
 between Pamellites and anti-Pamellites. Four voters 
 were married to ladies whose political views differed 
 from those held by their lords, and on the polling day 
 these gentle dames rose early in the morning and left 
 their respective homes, carrying every stitch of male 
 attire from the house, with the keys, after locking in 
 their unconscious victims. Fate, however, was against 
 the ladies. They had reckoned without the canvasser, 
 who, before the poll closed, discovered the clothesless 
 electors, and having wrapped them in blankets, had them 
 conveyed in carriages to the polling booths, where they 
 arrived just in time to record their votes. Thus does 
 Ireland still maintain its reputation for practical joking 
 at elections. Another amusing incident which happened 
 at the same General Election, in the north of Ireland, is 
 worthy of record. At the Londonderry election, where 
 the contest was very close, every voter literally with life 
 in him was brought to the poll, some in carriages, sonic 
 in Bath chairs, and one, ten minutes before the close, 
 in a bed. A working man executed a rather smart 
 mano2iivre. A warrant for his arrest to undergo two 
 months 1 imprisonment for wife beating had been out 
 against him for a week past. He was in hiding until 
 the day of the polling, when, huddled in bedclothing and 
 wearing a false beard, he was carried in as an invalid,
 
 AT THE POLLING BOOTHS 49 
 
 and voted. The man, however, was recognised by the 
 agent for the rival candidate, who called the attention 
 of the police to him ; but before the warrant could be 
 obtained he had disappeared. 
 
 A candidate, as we have seen, may not now hire 
 vehicles for conveying his supporters to the polling 
 stations ; but there is no limit placed to the gratuitous 
 assistance he may receive in that way from his well-to- 
 do friends. Private traps, broughams, and even equip- 
 ages of a more magnificent style, are freely given for 
 the occasions, to bring the lame, the halt, the blind, the 
 aged to the polling stations. 
 
 At eight o'clock every polling station is closed, and 
 the ballot-boxes are conveyed by the presiding officers 
 to some central building, where the counting takes place 
 under the sole direction and control of the returning 
 officer. The candidates or their agents must not inter- 
 fere. The returning officer cannot vote at the election ; 
 but if at the end of the count the votes at each side 
 should be equal, he may, if a registered elector, give a 
 casting vote. He also publicly declares the successful 
 candidate duly elected, and forthwith sends the return 
 to the writ of election, on which he has endorsed the 
 name of the member of Parliament for the division, to 
 the Crown Office at Westminster. 
 
 But it sometimes happens that the gentleman thus 
 returned as " M.P." does not enjoy these honoured 
 initials long. There may be a successful petition against 
 the election. Any violation of the law by a candidate 
 or his recognised agents, by the returning officer 
 or his subordinates, may be made the ground of a peti- 
 tion. A petition was formerly tried by a Committee 
 of the House of Commons. It is tried now, under the 
 
 D
 
 50 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Parliamentary Elections Act of 1868, by two judges, 
 who report the result to the Speaker. .After the General 
 Election of 1880 there were no fewer than ninety-five 
 petitions impugning returns on the ground of intimida- 
 tion, bribery, or personation, and many were sustained. 
 But after the General Election of 1886 there was not a 
 single petition. The Corrupt Practices Act of 1882, 
 and the Redistribution Act of 1885, which destroyed 
 several small boroughs always centres of unmitigated 
 corruption have done much to make our Parliamentary 
 elections pure.
 
 51 
 
 CHAPTER III 
 "M.P." 
 
 THE hurly-burly of the General Election is over ; the 
 six hundred and seventy members who constitute the 
 House of Commons have been duly returned ; and it is 
 well to consider now the pleasures and tribulations, the 
 disadvantages and advantages of a member of Parlia- 
 ment. 
 
 Lord Macaulay has described a Parliamentary career 
 as 
 
 A career in which the most its combatants can expect is 
 that by relinquishing liberal studies and social comfort, by 
 passing nights without sleep and summers without one 
 glimpse of the beauties of nature, they may attain that 
 laborious, that invidious, that closely watched slavery which 
 is mocked with the name of power. 
 
 Sir George Trevelvan, in his "Life of Lord 
 Macaulay, 11 corroborates his uncle, and gives us, from 
 personal experience also, a graphic description of what 
 he calls " the tedious and exhaustive routine " of an 
 M.IVs life during the sitting of Parliament. 
 
 Waiting whole evenings to vote [he says] and then walk- 
 ing half a mile at a foot's pace round and round the crowded 
 lobbies ; dining amidst clamour and confusion, with a divi- 
 sion twenty minutes long between two of the mouthfuls ;
 
 52 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 trudging home at three in the morning through the slush 
 of a February thaw ; and sitting behind Ministers in the 
 centre of a closely packed bench. during the hottest week 
 of the London summer. 
 
 If this were a complete picture of Parliamentary life 
 if M.P.s were such slaves and martyrs to duty as 
 they are here described it would indeed be difficult to 
 understand why a seat in the House of Commons 
 should be regarded as the highest object of ambition, 
 and be sighed for, and schemed for, and fought for by 
 thousands of able and wide-awake men. Above all, 
 one would be at a loss to comprehend the action of 
 men who, having had experience of Parliamentary life 
 of its hard and thankless work, of the mental strain 
 it involves, and of its physical inconveniences and dis- 
 comforts labour unceasingly, night and day, during 
 the three weeks or a month the General Election lasts, 
 and spend thousands of pounds to induce the electors 
 to send them back again to the weary and dreary round 
 of routine tasks at AVestminster. But the truth is, \ve 
 have been given only the dark features of Parlia- 
 mentary life. There is a bright side to the picture 
 also. The work of an M.P. is hard, but, as we shall 
 see presently, it has its compensations. 
 
 The tribulations of a member of Parliament are 
 undoubtedly many. Dark as is the picture drawn !>v 
 Macaulay, it could easily be made more forbidding. 
 In the first place, the initial cost of obtaining a seat in 
 the House of Commons is always great. In the " good 
 old-fashioned times," when bribery was flagrant and 
 avowed, no limit could be placed to the possible cost 
 of a seat in the House of Commons. A borough con- 
 stituency could not be had, probably, for less than
 
 "M.P." 53 
 
 5000. A candidate frequently spent 4*0,000 in 
 wooing the suffrages of the "free and independent 
 electors 11 few though they were of a county con- 
 stituency ; and in many a contest success was won at 
 the cost of bankruptcy and ruin. The most expensive 
 contest recorded in the annals of electioneering was the 
 famous light in 1807 for the representation of York- 
 shire. It is still called " the Austerlitz of Electioneer- 
 ing." The candidates were Lord Milton, son of Earl 
 Fitzwilliam (Whig) ; the Hon. Henry Lascelles, son of 
 Lord Harewood (Tory) ; and William Wilberforce 
 (Radical). The poll was taken in the castle yard at 
 York in thirteen booths, which, according to the exist- 
 ing law, was kept open from 9 A.M. to 5 P.M. for fifteen 
 davs. Wilberforce and Milton were returned. The 
 total number of electors who voted was 23,007, and 
 the three candidates spent between them o(?300,000, or 
 about df!3 for each vote polled. The pernicious in- 
 fluence of the purse in Parliamentary contests has, 
 however, been considerably reduced by recent statutes. 
 Candidates are obliged by the Corrupt Practices Act of 
 1883 (which has fixed a maximum scale of electioneer- 
 ing expenses, varying in amount according to the 
 extent and character of the constituency), to furnish a 
 return of their expenses. The object of that Act is 
 to help to make it easier for poorer men men who 
 have only talent and character (the two qualities which, 
 after all, best enable M.P.s to serve the State) to 
 enter the House of Commons; and that it has, with 
 the aid of the Redistribution Act of 1885, which 
 narrowed the area of constituencies, succeeded, to some 
 extent at least, cannot be denied. The General Elec- 
 tion of 1880 the last election in which expenditure
 
 54 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 was practically unlimited cost the candidates over 
 .2,000,000, or about fifteen shillings for each vote 
 polled. On the other hand, the General Election of 
 1885, which followed the Redistribution Act, and was 
 also held under the Corrupt Practices Act of 1883, cost 
 only <!, 026,646, or 4s. 5d. for each vote polled. 
 
 The tendency of the expenditure is happily still 
 downwards. According to the Blue Book issued in 
 connection with the General Election of 1892, it appears 
 that only 958,532 0*. ld, or 170,897 19*. 10^7. less 
 than the maximum scale allowed by the Act of 1883, 
 which is 1, 129,430, was spent by the one thousand 
 three hundred and seven candidates who fought for seats 
 in the House of Commons in that electoral campaign. 
 Still, the average expenses of the six hundred and 
 seventy successful candidates were about seven hundred 
 pounds each a big sum, indeed, to have to pay for the 
 opportunity of giving one's services to the State. But 
 that does not, as a rule, represent a third of the financial 
 cost of the honour and dignity of the office of member 
 of Parliament. Before the contest takes place, the con- 
 stituency has to be "nursed, 11 with a view to securing 
 the good-will and support of the electors. " Nursing "* 
 is a very expensive process. Many a man has spent 
 from one to five thousand pounds a year, for two or even 
 five years before the General Election, in the consti- 
 tuency he aspires to represent. A newspaper has often 
 been run by a prospective candidate at a tremendous 
 loss, ostensibly for the laudable object of supplying the 
 electors with news, but really to keep prominently before 
 them the virtues of the man who is wooing their 
 suffrages, and the grandeur and sublimity of the political 
 principles he supports.
 
 "M.P." 55 
 
 And this process of " nursing " does not end with the 
 election of the "nurse"" to the House of Commons. 
 Gratitude, which is well defined, in electioneering matters 
 at least, as a lively sense of favours to come, makes it 
 incumbent on the M.P. to pay careful attention to the 
 wants and wishes of his constituents. He cannot afford 
 to ignore a request from even the humblest and obscurest 
 of electors. His popularity depends, in a large measure, 
 on his mode of dealing with communications from con- 
 stituents. And knowing the dependent and trammelled 
 position, in that respect, of their member, his consti- 
 tuents make the most extravagant and unreasonable 
 demands on his time antl purse. Some idea of the enor- 
 mous amount of correspondence which members of 
 Parliament have to deal with at the House of 
 Commons itself, may be gathered from the statement 
 that something like thirty-two thousand letters and 
 nineteen thousand telegrams are received and despatched 
 every week during the session. Begging letters form no 
 small part of this vast mass of correspondence. Time 
 was when a member of Parliament had some patronage to 
 distribute in the way of posts in the Customs, the Excise 
 and other Civil departments of the State, if the party he 
 supported were in power a sort of small change to 
 scatter amongst the electors. But that time is gone and 
 for ever. The establishment of open competition for 
 posts in the Civil Service did away with these gifts to 
 constituents by which members rewarded past services 
 and secured future support. The only patronage now 
 at the disposal of an M.P., when his party is in office, is 
 the nomination to any vacant sub-post-office in his 
 constituency an eventuality which seldom arises, greatly 
 to the relief of our representatives, because for the one
 
 56 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 friend they secure in the successful person in such trans- 
 actions, they make twenty enemies among those who 
 are disappointed. 
 
 It would seem, however, as if a large number of the 
 electors are still under the impression that their repre- 
 sentatives have abundance of nice, fat, comfortable posts 
 at their disposal. Members of Parliament are consc- 
 sequently inundated with demands from supporters for 
 posts for their sons and daughters as clerks and messen- 
 gers to the House of Commons, typists in the different 
 State departments, boatmen in the Customs service, 
 private secretaries, and countless other positions outside 
 of Parliament and the Civil Service, which it is believed 
 the influence of our legislators could easily procure. 
 
 Then there are the letters from constituents half 
 pathetic and half laughable from fathers of families who 
 are visited w ith illness and distress, and require pecuniary 
 assistance; from tradesmen on the verge of bankruptcy, 
 who could be restored to a sound financial position by a 
 loan of fifty pounds ; and from exemplary young men 
 about to marry who plead that they could spend a 
 pleasant week in London honeymooning if their member 
 only supplied the necessary five-pound note. They 
 would even call at the House of Commons and introduce 
 their brides to the member, if he complied with their 
 simple request. And there is always an inevitable P.S. 
 to such letters, " If you cannot spare 5 I would take 
 4}% 10*." What member of Parliament is there who is not 
 also familiar with the dear old friend who knew him thirty 
 years ago, and who as things have not gone very well with 
 him recently, desires to find solace for his troubles in the 
 renewal of the pleasant acquaintanceship ; or the young 
 man whose father and his father were "chums" 1 a "act
 
 "M.P" 57 
 
 which somehow has not saved this son of the friend of 
 his parent from getting heavily into debt, and making 
 free with the moneys of his employer, and who now with 
 horrible visions of handcuffs and treadmills disturbing 
 his sleep o" 1 nights makes tragic appeals for a loan ("only 
 a loan ") to enable him to return, regenerated, to the 
 j)uths of virtue. Then there are the widows of 
 electors who have been left with marriageable daughters, 
 and want to know whether husbands for them cannot be 
 found, if not among the members, at least among the 
 policemen on duty about the House ; tradesmen who 
 send on samples of their goods whiskies, walking-sticks, 
 and even perambulators (if the announcement of an 
 interesting event in the member's family has been 
 published) with requests for testimonials ; ingenious 
 persons who have invented mixtures, pellets and 
 appliances for transforming a hoarse voice into a voice 
 silvery, ringing, and resonant, and making the dull and 
 turgid speaker clear and eloquent. In fact the impu- 
 dence of man and of woman also, is exhibited in all its 
 sublimity in the begging-letter section of an M.P/s 
 correspondence. 
 
 Cobden, in a letter to a friend, written early in 1846, 
 when his name as the leader of the agitation for the 
 repeal of the Corn Laws was in all men's mouths, gives 
 us an amusing glimpse into the letter-bag of an M.P. 
 
 The next time I meet Dickens or Jerrold [he writes] I 
 shall assuredly give them a hint for a new hero of the 
 stage or the novel " The Popular Man." 
 
 He then goes on to say : 
 
 First, half the mad people in the country who are still 
 at large, and they are legion, address their incoherent
 
 58 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 ravings to the most notorious man of the hour. Next, the 
 kindred tribe who think themselves poets, who are more 
 difficult than the mad people to deal with, send their 
 doggerel and solicit subscriptions to their volumes, with 
 occasional requests to be allowed to dedicate them. Then 
 there are the Jeremy Diddlers, who begin their epistles 
 with high-flown compliments upon my services to the 
 millions, and always wind up with a request that I will 
 bestow a trifle upon the individual who ventures to lay his 
 distressing case before me. To add to my miseries, people 
 have now got an idea that I am influential with the 
 Government, and the small place - hunters are at me. 
 Yesterday a man wrote from Yorkshire, wanting the situa- 
 tion of a gauger, and to-day a person in Herts requests 
 me to procure him a place in the post-office. Then there 
 are all the benevolent enthusiasts who have their pet 
 reforms, who think that because a man has sacrificed him- 
 self in mind, body, and estate, in attempting to do one 
 thing, he is the very person to do all the rest. These good 
 people dog me with their projects. Nothing, in their eyes, 
 is impossible in my hands. One worthy man calls to assure 
 me that I can reform the Church and unite the Wesleyans 
 with the Establishment. 
 
 Cobden enclosed a specimen of the begging-letters he 
 was accustomed to receive. It was from a lady asking 
 him to become her "generous and noble-minded 
 benefactor." As she desired to begin to do something 
 for herself, she hoped he would procure her " a loan of 
 X'SOOO to enable her to rear poultry for London and 
 other large market towns." 
 
 In another letter, written July 14-, 18H>, after the 
 taxes on bread stuffs had been repealed, and the Corn 
 Law League disbanded, Cobden says : 
 
 I thought I should be allowed to be forgotten after my
 
 "M.P." 59 
 
 address to my constituents. But every post brings me 
 twenty or thirty letters and such letters ! I am teased to 
 death by place-hunters of every degree, who wish me to 
 procure them Government appointments. Brothers of peers 
 aye, "honorables " are amongst the number. I have but 
 one answer for all " I would not ask a favour of the 
 Ministry to serve my own brother." I often think what 
 must be the fate of Lord John, or Peel, with half the needy 
 aristocracy knocking at the Treasury doors. 
 
 Even in adversity Cobden was pursued by letter 
 writers. In the General Election of 1857 he stood for 
 Huddersfield and was defeated. Bright also fell at 
 Manchester. Both had opposed the Crimean War, 
 and, popular heroes though they had been a few years 
 earlier, both went down before the war-passion which 
 then swept the country. " I am pestered," writes 
 Cobden, " with innumerable letters from kind people 
 who have taken up the notion that I must require 
 encouragement and condolence. And they have all 
 sorts of projects ready cut and dry for me, as if I could 
 begin a life of agitation again, and repeat the labours 
 of my prime, now that I am past the zenith." 
 
 The temptations of a member of Parliament are also 
 numerous and exasperating. He is frequently offered 
 bribes if he will allow his name to be used in the 
 Hoating of some company, or in the advertising of some 
 article of common use or patent medicine ; if he will use 
 his influence in obtaining a Government contract for a 
 certain firm, or in securing for some person a post in 
 the gift of one of the Ministers. In a recent debate in 
 the House of Commons on the payment of members, 
 Mr. John Burns created much amusement by read- 
 ing his reply to an offer of fifty pounds made by a
 
 60 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 person in Belfast if he succeeded in obtaining for him a 
 vacant collectorship of taxes. " Sir," replied Mr. Burns, 
 " you are a scoundrel. I wish you were within reach of 
 my boot." 
 
 Our legislators are also flooded with appeals in aid 
 of funds for churches, chapels, mission halls, schools, 
 working-men's institutes, political clubs, hospitals, 
 asylums, and institutions of all kinds ; and although 
 many of them may never have played cricket or foot- 
 ball, or run a race in their lives, and would not trust 
 themselves on bicycles any more than on wild mustangs, 
 they are expected to become patrons and presidents 
 (paying substantial donations for the honour) of every 
 athletic, cricket, football and bicycle club in their 
 constituencies. Then there are many local functions 
 religious, social, and political to which they arc 
 invited. Whenever a meeting for any purpose is being 
 organised in a constituency, the first thought is to try 
 to get the member to attend. The more conspicuous 
 he is in Parliament, and therefore the more likely to 
 attract an audience, the greater is the volume of these 
 invitations which pour in upon him week after week, 
 and the more widespread is the disappointment and 
 dissatisfaction among his constituents if he does not 
 attend. He is expected to preside at smoking concerts 
 and local political dinners, to attend picnics and fetes 
 of friendly societies, to visit local clubs, to open bazaars, 
 and to say a few words at charity performances and 
 mixed entertainments of a political character, at which 
 he is sandwiched between sentimental and comic singers, 
 and is forced to imbibe numberless cups of inferior tea. 
 
 The constitutional relations between a member of 
 Parliament and his constituents is a subject that has
 
 "M.P." 61 
 
 exercised the minds of political thinkers. Is he a repre- 
 sentative or a delegate ? Is he a mere agent appointed 
 to express the desires and will of his constituents in 
 Parliament, or may he exercise his own judgment on 
 things as a substantive and separate authority, in- 
 dependent of those who sent him to Parliament ? 
 Edmund Burke gave expression to his views on this 
 interesting question at Bristol, during the General 
 Election of 1774, in a speech that is memorable in the 
 political literature of the kingdom. 
 
 It ought [he said] to be the happiness and glory of a 
 representative to live in the strictest union, the closest 
 correspondence, and the most unreserved communication 
 with his constituents. Their wishes ought to have great 
 weight with him, their opinion high respect, their business 
 unremitted attention. It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, 
 his pleasures, his satisfaction to theirs ; and above all, in all 
 cases to prefer their interest to his own. 
 
 So far so good. But there is a qualification which 
 now comes in. 
 
 But his unbiased opinion, his mature judgment, his en- 
 lightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, to 
 any man, or to any set of men living. These he does not 
 derive from your pleasure ; no, nor from the law and the 
 Constitution. They are a trust from Providence, for the 
 abuse of which he is deeply answerable. Your representa- 
 tive owes you not his industry only, but his judgment, and 
 he betrays instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your 
 opinions. 
 
 Parliament [lie went on, in another splendid passage] is 
 not a congress of ambassadors from different and hostile 
 interests, which interests each must maintain as an agent
 
 62 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 and advocate against other agents and advocates ; but Par- 
 liament is a deliberative assembly of one nation, with one 
 interest, that of the whole, where not local purposes, not 
 local prejudices, ought to guide, but the general good 
 resulting from the general reason of the whole. You 
 choose a member indeed ; but when you have chosen 
 him he is not member for Bristol, but he is a member of 
 Parliament. If the local constituent should have an 
 interest, or should form a hasty opinion, evidently opposite 
 to the real good of the rest of the community, the member 
 for that place ought to be as far as any other from any 
 endeavour to give it effect. 
 
 Macaulay held similar views. He refused, as we 
 have seen, to canvass the electors at Leeds. He also 
 refused to give any pledges. 
 
 Just as a physician understands medicine better than 
 an ordinary man [he wrote], just as a shoemaker makes 
 shoes better than an ordinary man, so a person whose life 
 is passed in transacting affairs of State becomes a better 
 statesman than an ordinary man. In politics as well as 
 every other department of life the public ought to have 
 the means of checking those who serve it. If a man finds 
 that he derives no benefit from the prescription of his 
 physician, he calls in another. If his shoes do not fit him, 
 he changes his shoemaker. But when he has called in a 
 physician of whom he has heard a good report, and whose 
 general practice he believes to be judicious, it would be 
 absurd in him to tie down that physician to order parti- 
 cular pills and particular draughts. While he continues to 
 be the customer of a shoemaker it would be absurd in him 
 to sit by and note every motion of that shoemaker's hand. 
 And in the same manner it would, I think, be absurd in 
 him to require positive pledges and to exact daily and 
 hourly obedience from his representative.
 
 "M.P." 63 
 
 But those really arc counsels of perfection. No mem- 
 ber of Parliament can, in our days, afford to live up 
 to so high an ideal of his public duty. It is not in 
 human nature for a man who has reached, through 
 the expensive and worrying ordeal of an election, the 
 pri/e of his ambition, a seat in the House of Commons, 
 and who naturally desires to retain it as long as possible, 
 to look down upon his constituents from the high moral 
 altitude of Burke and Macaulay; and to flout the 
 will of his constituents, when he knows that a day of 
 reckoning is certain. At the General Election his con- 
 stituents would hunt such a representative ignominiously 
 from amongst them with cries of " traitor " ringing in 
 his ears, and perhaps unsavoury missiles flying about 
 his person. Indeed, this theory that the people in 
 electing a representative surrender their power to him 
 for the period of Parliament, and that he is bound to 
 exercise his judgment independently of the wishes of his 
 constituents, which generally prevailed amongst states- 
 men of the days of Burke and Macaulay, was never 
 accepted by the people. Burke was elected for Bristol 
 in 1774, but the opinions he expressed in the House of 
 ( 'ommons on the public questions of the day were not 
 the views of his constituents, and at the General Elec- 
 tion of 1780 he was brought to account. 
 
 I did not obey your instructions [he exclaimed, in a 
 speech to the electors]. No ; I conformed to the instruc- 
 tions of truth and nature, and maintained your interest 
 against your opinions with a constancy that became me. 
 And now > gentlemen [he went on, in passages of wonderful 
 eloquence and rare nobility], on this serious day, when I 
 come as it were to make up my account with you, let me 
 take to myself some degree of honest pride on the nature
 
 64 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 of the charges that are against me. I do not here stand 
 before you accused of venality or of neglect of duty. It 
 is not said that in the long period of my service I have in 
 a single instance sacrificed the slightest of your interests 
 to my ambition or to my fortune. It is not alleged that 
 to gratify any anger or revenge of my own, or of my party, 
 I have had a share in wronging or oppressing any descrip- 
 tion of men, or any one man in any description. Xo ! the 
 charges against me are all of one kind : that I have pushed 
 the principles of general justice and benevolence too far, 
 farther than a cautious policy would warrant, and farther 
 than the opinions of many would go along with me. In 
 every accident which may happen through life in pain. 
 in sorrow, in depression and distress I will call to mind 
 this accusation and be comforted. 
 
 But the tide of prejudice against him was too 
 strong; he had to retire badly beaten from the con- 
 test ! 
 
 The electors of Bristol have often l)een censured, and 
 very properly censured, for their narrow-mindedness 
 and intolerance in dismissing Burke. A century has 
 passed since then a hundred years of steady progress 
 in enlightenment, tolerance, and magnanimity ; but 
 where is the constituency to-day ready to elect a repre- 
 sentative opposed to its political views ? There is 
 nothing more certain than that Burke would be re- 
 jected at Bristol to-day as he was a century ago, 
 unless he looked eye to eye with the majority of the 
 electors at the political questions of our time. The 
 truth is that the people everywhere regard members of 
 Parliament as their legislative agents, and insist that 
 their wishes, and not the individual opinions of their 
 representatives, shall prevail in the House of Com-
 
 "M.P." 65 
 
 mons. But an M.P. is not altogether at the mercy of 
 the whims and caprices of his constituency. The in- 
 fluence of party is supreme in the land, and that 
 influence often saves a representative from being made 
 the mere agent of the particularist, or sectional, or 
 local will of his constituency. In fact, a member of 
 Parliament is to-day not so much the delegate of a 
 constituency as the nominee of a political party. He 
 is returned to support the principles of one political 
 party or the other in the House of Commons. Occa- 
 sionally a representative is hard pressed by sectional 
 interests, or local demands ; so much so, indeed, that Mr. 
 Goschen once voicing the feelings of many M.P.s 
 uttered an intense cry for " liberty from the tyranny of 
 the pressure of interests."" But, as a rule, local con- 
 siderations and sectional objects are held to be sub- 
 sidiary to the interests of party to the aim of each 
 party to secure or retain the machinery of Government. 
 The free judgment of a member of Parliament is more 
 or less shackled by the pledges now universally de- 
 manded at the General Election, and now freely given 
 without the representative thinking that in doing so 
 he is deviating in the slightest degree from the strict 
 line of his public duty ; but the shackles are imposed in 
 the interest of a political party, and not for the local 
 behoof of the constituency. 
 
 And yet, with all his attention to the desires, reason- 
 able and unreasonable ; the whims, the fads, and 
 caprices of his constituents, what M.P. can truly say 
 that his seat is safe ? Difficult as it is to get into 
 Parliament, to remain there is still less easy. The 
 insecurity of the tenure by which a seat in the House 
 is held, is, perhaps, the greatest drawback of Parlia- 
 
 E
 
 66 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 mentary life. A man with ambition and talent for 
 office has done splendid service for his party in Opposi- 
 tion. The General Election comes; his party is vic- 
 torious, but he himself has lost his seat; and he has 
 the mortification of seeing another receive the portfolio 
 which would have been his in happier circumstances. 
 To such a man who has had experience of the intoxica- 
 ting delights of a Parliamentary career, and who had 
 hoped to make politics a profession, life outside the 
 House is barren, dreary, and intolerable. And yet 
 such are the uncertainties of elections he may never 
 again cross the charmed threshold of the House of 
 Commons. 
 
 Macaulay, writing to his sister, Hannah (subse- 
 quently Lady Trevelyan), on June 17, 1833, after 
 he had been a few years in the House of Commons, 
 says: 
 
 I begin to wonder what the fascination is which attracts 
 men who could sit over their tea and their book in their 
 own cool, quiet room to breathe bad air, hear bad speeches, 
 lounge up and down the long gallery, and doze uneasily on 
 the green benches till three in the morning. Thank God, 
 these luxuries are not necessary for me. My pen is suffi- 
 cient for my support, and my sister's company is sufficient 
 for my happiness. Only let me see her well and cheerful, 
 and let offices in Government and seats in Parliament go 
 to those who care for them. If I were to leave public life 
 to-morrow, I declare that, except for the vexation which 
 it might give you and one or two others, the event would 
 not be in the slightest degree painful to me. 
 
 But Parliamentary life, notwithstanding all its draw- 
 backs, has a fascination which few men who have once
 
 "M.P." 67 
 
 breathed its intoxicating atmosphere can successfully 
 resist. Most men quit the House with pain and 
 regret ; they long with the deepest longing to get back 
 again ; and they cannot complacently settle down to 
 private life. 
 
 I am going into the wilderness to pray for a return of 
 the taste I once possessed for nature and simple, quiet life 
 [wrote Cobden, from a retreat in Wales, in July 1846, after 
 the object of his Parliamentary career, the repeal of the 
 Corn Laws, had been achieved]. Here I am, one day 
 from Manchester, in the loveliest valley out of Paradise. 
 Ten years ago, before I was an agitator, 1 spent a day or 
 two in this house. Comparing my sensations now with 
 those I then experienced, I feel how much I have lost 
 in winning public fame. The rough tempest has spoiled 
 me for the quiet haven. I feel I shall never be able to 
 cast anchor again. It seems as if some mesmeric hand 
 were on my brain, or that I was possessed by an unquiet 
 fiend urging me forward in spite of myself. 
 
 Even the old war- worn agitators who have retired 
 from the arena, often wish to be back again amid the 
 shoutings of the rival parties, and the trampings through 
 the division lobbies. Lady Trevelyan, writing in her 
 son's life of her brother, Lord Macaulay, states that in 
 1830 she was staying at Mr. William A Vi Ibex-force's, at 
 High wood Hill, when she received a letter from Macaulay, 
 enclosing one from Ijord Lansdowne, offering him the 
 vacant seat in the pocket borough of Calne. She 
 showed Lansdowne's letter to Wilberforce. " He was 
 silent for a moment," she writes, " and then his mobile 
 face lighted up, and he slapped his hand to his ear, and 
 cried : ' Ah, I hear that shout again. Hear, hear ! 
 What a life it was! 111
 
 68 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 " I have met Englishmen who lost their seats at the 
 General Election, and who discussed the disaster as 
 pathetically as if they had lost an arm or an eye."" So 
 writes Mr. William O'Brien in the Contemporary Rcv'/cic 
 for June 1896. He, however, regarded the termina- 
 tion or interruption of his Parliamentary career with 
 different feelings. " They looked," he says, " as if they 
 Avanted to make sure that they were not being jested 
 with when I told them that to hear Big Ben chiming 
 the (juarters once more, melodiously though it clanged 
 over the wide spreading river, sounded to my ears like 
 the summons of the morning prison bell in Tullamore 
 rousing me to another of those long, long, weary days.' 1 ' 1 
 But then the lot of an Irish member of Parliament 
 has many disadvantages not associated with the position 
 of an English member of Parliament. For one thing, 
 the police of Ireland regard members of Parliament 
 with curious contempt. The Irish Times of Dublin 
 was represented at a proclaimed meeting that is, a 
 political gathering suppressed by the authorities at 
 Ennis, in 1889, by a reporter Avho wore a tall hat. In 
 the melee a policeman smashed the hat with a blow of 
 his baton. " What did you do that for ? " asked the 
 reporter, indignantly ; " I am a member of the Press." 
 " Oh, I beg your pardon," said the constable, most apolo- 
 getically and humbly ; " sure, I thought you were a mem- 
 ber of Parliament." Even a Cabinet Minister is " no great 
 things " in the eyes of an Irish policeman. A well-known 
 lady en route to the first drawing-room given by the 
 Countess Cadogan in Dublin Castle, in 1896, found 
 herself hopelessly blocked in a long line of carriages 
 containing those unimportant people who had not the 
 entree to which she herself was entitled. Much annoyed
 
 "M.P" 69 
 
 that the policeman on duty would not allow her to 
 break through the crowd of vehicles around her, she 
 leant out of the carriage window and said to him in 
 
 O 
 
 somewhat imperious tones, " Perhaps you do not know 
 that I am the wife of a Cabinet Minister?' 1 '' "If you 
 were the wife of a Presbyterian minister," replied the 
 constable, " I could not let you pass ! '" 
 
 There is no doubt that most of the men who aspire 
 to seats in the House of Commons do so with an honest 
 and genuine desire to serve the State, to benefit the 
 community, to promote that primary object of good 
 government, "the greatest happiness of the greatest 
 number." These they rightly consider to lie the chief 
 functions of a legislator; and in the first flush of their 
 enthusiasm after election, many of them intrepidly and 
 /ealously set about informing themselves on the subjects 
 that are likely to engage the attention of Parliament. 
 They soon discover, however, that to do this properly 
 would leave them very little time for anything else. 
 Kvery M.P. finds his breakfast-table heaped each morn- 
 ing during the Session with an enormous pile of Par- 
 liamentary papers, such as Blue-books, Bills, reports, 
 returns, and other documents. Blue-books are uni- 
 versally admitted to be not very exciting reading, 
 and eighty volumes ominously ponderous and por- 
 tentously dull are on an average issued every year, 
 all of them demanding the immediate attention of 
 the conscientious legislator. The Bills, or embryo Acts 
 of Parliament, are more inviting, embodying, as they 
 do, the fads and hobbies entertained by the 670 
 memliers of the House of Commons. About 300 of 
 these Bills are introduced every session, and are printed 
 and circulated amongst members, who are expected to
 
 70 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 make themselves acquainted with their provisions. 
 Most of them, perhaps, give up the task in despair ; 
 and instead of attempting to arrive at independent 
 conclusions by personal investigation and study, largely 
 rely on the speeches of their political leaders to 
 direct them on the right path in regard to the public 
 questions of the day. But it is not all plain sailing 
 even when that la/y course is taken. "The worst effect 
 on myself resulting from listening to the debates in 
 Parliament," 11 wrote Monckton Milnes (Lord Houghton), 
 " is that it prevents me from forming any clear political 
 opinion on any subject." 11 
 
 One of the cruel disappointments in the career of an 
 M.P., who asph'es "the listening senate to command," 
 is that, after devoting days and nights to the manu- 
 facture of antitheses, epigrams, and other flowers of 
 rhetoric for his speech in a great debate, he patiently 
 sits night after night, during the time allotted for the 
 debate, on the pounce to " catch the Speaker's eye," but 
 fails to fix the attention of that wandering orb; while 
 he hears his arguments and his illustrations used by 
 other men, who had probably gone to the same source 
 for them ; until at last the end comes without an oppor- 
 tunity having been afforded him of relieving his mind of 
 the weighty unspoken speech which oppresses it. Then 
 his constituents complain that he is a useless " silent 
 member, 11 if they do not see his name figuring in the 
 newspaper reports. They are convinced he is neglecting 
 his duty. And what consolation is it to him to think 
 of the old saving that "they are the wisest part of 
 Parliament who use the greatest silence ; "" or of the 
 opinion of the party leaders especially the leaders of 
 the party in office that he is the most useful of
 
 "M.P." 71 
 
 members who never takes part in the debates, but is 
 ever at hand to record his vote when the division bells 
 ring out their alarum ? 
 
 There was once a member of the representative 
 chamber who declared that his invariable rule was 
 never to be present at a debate or absent at a division. 
 He had only once in his long political life ventured 
 to vote according to his conscience ; and he had found 
 that on that occasion he had voted wrong". It is 
 
 o 
 
 true that this model Ministerialist or supporter of the 
 party in office, flourished in the long, long ago. But 
 the member who always votes at his party's call and 
 never dreams of thinking for himself at all is not 
 yet extinct, and indeed is likely to be always with us. 
 It must, however, be a sore tribulation to many an 
 M.P. to find his opinions dictated by his leaders and 
 his movements controlled by the Whips. Party disci- 
 pline is very strict, and violations of it, however slight, 
 are rarely condoned. If a member is bold enough to 
 take an independent stand in regard to any of the 
 political questions of the day, his speech in the House, 
 explaining his position, is received with scoffs and jeers by 
 his colleagues, and, what is perhaps more uncomfortable, 
 with approving cheers by members on the other side. 
 Such action is often evidence of a good patriot ; but 
 in the House of Commons it is commonly regarded as 
 proof of a crank and a faddist, and he who takes it is 
 severely " cut " by his party. Again, strongly worded 
 and heavily underscored communications, demanding 
 his immediate attendance at Westminster, are frequently 
 delivered to him at the most inopportune moments 
 when he is just sitting down to a delightful little dinner, 
 or about to leave his house for a pleasant night at the
 
 72 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Gaiety Theatre and if, yielding to the temptations of 
 the flesh, he ignores this peremptory call of political 
 duty, he is held guilty of a grave breach of discipline. 
 His past services are forgotten, he gets a solemn 
 lecture from the Chief Whip on the enormity of his 
 offence ; and, mayhap, his name is published in an official 
 " black list "" of defaulters, or he comes across a nasty 
 little paragraph exposing his neglect of duty in the 
 local newspaper which most widely circulates among his 
 constituents. 
 
 But, happily, when the litany of the tribulations, 
 vexations and disappointments of an M.P. is exhausted, 
 there remain to be told many countervailing pleasures 
 and advantages, which make the pri/e, in many respects 
 the dazzling prize, of a seat in the House of Commons 
 well worth the physical labour and mental worry in- 
 volved in winning it, and retaining it. 
 
 A member of the House of Commons is allowed to 
 attach to his name the magic letters " M.1V which are 
 a source of natural pride and gratification to himself, 
 and secure for him the respect and deference of others. 
 These initials undoubtedly contribute, too, to his social 
 status. They carry with them considerable social dis- 
 tinction. Doors of circles, hitherto locked and barred, 
 are open wide to him, to his wife and daughters ; and 
 invitations to functions in the houses of the great and 
 wealthy members of his party reach him during the 
 Session. Then, he is a member of " the best club in 
 London."" It is, indeed, frequently denied that the 
 House of Commons still maintains that pre-eminence as 
 a social haunt of men, which, it is universally acknow- 
 ledged, once rightly belonged to it. As a matter of 
 fact, the House is more of a club now than it has ever
 
 "M.P." 73 
 
 been in its ceuturied existence. It is provided with 
 handsome dining-rooms, smoking-rooms, reading-rooms ; 
 only last year it advanced another important stage in 
 its continuous development and progress as a club, by 
 having a suite of bath-rooms and dressing-rooms added 
 to its entourage. In its smoking-room, by all accounts, 
 may be met, in the pleasant relaxation of chat and 
 gossip, not only some of the most distinguished men 
 in the kingdom, but a far greater variety of types of 
 men than can be encountered in the smoking-room of 
 any club in London. Mr. Labouchere, indeed, has said 
 a couple of hours could be passed far more enjoyably in 
 the smoking-room of the House of Commons than in 
 the smoking-room of the Carlton or Reform Club. It 
 was the member for Northampton also who declared 
 that the House of Commons was not only one of the 
 pleasantest, but one of the healthiest places in the 
 world, and that he far preferred a month on its green 
 benches to a month on the promenade of Brighton. 
 
 Many members of Parliament undoubtedly obtain 
 pleasure and excitement from several of the experiences 
 set out in the record of their worries and tribulations. 
 Their extensive and varied correspondence, with all its 
 manifestations of strange phases of human nature, is a 
 source of entertainment to some, and its effect on others 
 is that it tickles their sense of self-importance. Some 
 M.P.s even like to be interviewed by well-known fre- 
 quenters of the outer lobby, such as the old lady who 
 alleged that the Crown had robbed her of <3,000,000, 
 and the engineer with a scheme for connecting Ireland 
 with Great Britain by a bridge, thrown across the 
 Channel via the Isle of Man. To some members, 
 invitations from constituents to attend ba/aars, flower
 
 74 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 shows, tea meetings, smoking concerts, are perhaps the 
 most exasperating torments of Parliamentary life. 
 Others welcome them as flattering testimonies to their 
 popularity with their constituents, and make it a point 
 to accept every one of them. At the last General 
 Election one candidate issued a very interesting card in 
 support of his appeal for a renewal of the confidence of 
 the constituency. It set forth, not the measures he had 
 advocated by his voice and supported by his vote, not 
 the legislation he had helped to improve, to carry, or 
 to defeat, but the meetings and dinners and flower- 
 shows he had attended on the invitation of electors. 
 Here it is : 
 
 1. Political meetings held in every corner of this 
 great division ....... 53 
 
 Irrespective of party, at the request of his constituents : 
 
 2. Concerts and dinners ..... 38 
 
 3. Friendly societies' meetings . . . . 18 
 
 4. Bazaars and flowers shows .... 23 
 
 5. Athletic meetings ...... 4 
 
 136 
 
 If you think Mr. - 's efforts, as detailed above, a ful- 
 filment of his pledge to serve the constituency to the best 
 of his ability, please do not fail to record your vote in his 
 favour. 
 
 There is a popular belief that members arc paid 
 five guineas per day for their attendance on Select 
 Committees, but it is utterly unfounded. This is 
 the only country where members of Parliament 
 except those who hold offices in the Government 
 receive absolutely no pecuniary emoluments in return
 
 "M.P." 75 
 
 for their services to the State. It is true that in 
 Italv, us in Spain, senators and deputies receive no 
 salary, but then they are allowed travelling expenses 
 and enjoy many immunities and advantages, which 
 make their membership a position of financial interest. 
 In Greece the senators get P20 per month and the 
 deputies W ; in France, members of each House 
 receive \ per day ; in Denmark, about 16*. per dav ; 
 in Germany, about 10.?. (yd. per (lay. In Austria the 
 pay is 1 per day. In Belgium each member of the 
 Chamber of Representatives gets PIT per month. In 
 Portugal the peers and commoners are paid an equal 
 sum, which is about 67 a year. In Switzerland, 
 members of the National Council get 10*. 6d. daily, and 
 the Council of State (the Lower House) about 6*. In 
 the United States every senator and member of the 
 House of Representatives receives PI 000 per annum, 
 besides a mileage allowance, at the rate of Wd. a mile, 
 for travelling expenses to and from Washington, and 
 P25 a year for stationery. In Victoria, M.P.s are paid 
 X'240 a year. But if payment of members is not a 
 feature of our representative system, every member 
 and especially the young, and able, and ambitious has 
 a chance of an office in an Administration ; and nice fat 
 salaries though, indeed, in no case more than the work 
 to be done warrants are attached to these positions. 
 
 It is not, however, the salaries, but the offices 
 which carry these emoluments, that, happily, most 
 of the young and ambitious members of Parliament 
 desire to attain. The possession of a post even the 
 humblest in the Administration carries with it a seat 
 on the Treasury Bench, cheek by jowl with eminent 
 statesmen whose names are household words in the land ;
 
 76 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 and the right, when addressing the House, to stand 
 before the famous despatch-box, to lean on it, ami 
 even to thump it, as a relief to the feelings in the very 
 passion of the argument, as it has been thumped by 
 Lord John Kussell, Lord Palmerston, Mr. Disraeli, Mr. 
 Gladstone, and other famous Parliamentarians. The 
 competition for the higher offices in the Administration 
 is, it is true, keen and fierce. The House of Commons 
 is by no means free from intrigue, jealousy, envy, greet! ; 
 and the qualities of strength of will and tenacity of 
 purpose are requisite in an ambitious member if he is 
 to save himself from being pushed aside, if not knocked 
 down and trodden upon, in the race for place. But 
 once on the Treasury Bench, half the battle for an office 
 in the very hierarchy of the Administration, with a seat 
 in the Cabinet, is won. " Yes,"" said Disraeli, " I have 
 climbed to the top of the greasy pole," as an old 
 acquaintance, meeting him within a few days of his first 
 Premiership, congratulated him on his triumph. When 
 a member is admitted within that holy of holies, the 
 Cabinet, he may attempt to climb " the greasy pole." 
 
 There are other material advantages attached to a 
 seat in the House of Commons, apart from the prospect 
 of obtaining office in an Administration. The demand 
 for M.P.s as directors of companies is always brisk, 
 though of late, since the untold ruin and miserv created 
 by the failure of the Jal>ez Balfour companies, this 
 means of adding to income is very properly discounte- 
 nanced and looked upon with distrust and aversion by 
 the vast majority of the members. A barrister-at-law 
 also finds that a seat in the House of Commons 
 materially advances his position in his profession ; and 
 if he succeeds in distinguishing himself in tlebate the
 
 "M.P." 77 
 
 great prize of a place on the Judicial Bench is always in 
 the offing. " I wrote books for twenty years," I have 
 heard of an author saying, " and I was nobody ; I got 
 into Parliament, and before I had taken my seat I had 
 become somebody."" Finally, to every member of Parlia- 
 ment these two privileges are given : a seat in St. Mar- 
 garet's Church, and a reader's ticket for the library of the 
 British Museum without the otherwise essential recom- 
 mendation of a London householder. 
 
 But many men enter the House of Commons without 
 any social or political ambition. Every General Election 
 sends to the House a fresh contingent of old men who, 
 having spent themselves in trade and commerce, take to 
 politics in their old age as a mild relaxation or a means 
 of prolonging life. There is a story told of a great 
 mercantile magnate who, when he left for ever his desk 
 in the City, after an association of half a century, found 
 the separation a terrible strain, and was likely to pine 
 and mope his way to an early grave. His medical 
 adviser recommended him to take up politics as a hobby 
 and secure a seat in the House of Commons. But the 
 old man did not like the idea. He knew nothing of 
 politics. The financial intelligence was the only portion 
 of his morning paper he had read for fifty years. " If 
 you do not go into the House of Commons you will 
 have to go to Paradise," said the doctor ; " it is the only 
 alternative." " Then I will choose the House of Com- 
 mons,"" said the old City man. 
 
 To sit silently on the green benches during a debate, 
 save when they cheer a member of their party, or roar 
 at an opponent, and to walk through the division 
 lobbies, as directed by the Whips, when the question is 
 put, amply satisfies the ambition of such men. They
 
 78 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 seem to grow younger every day of their Parliamentary 
 life. Disraeli once said to a friend who had just entered 
 the House of Commons : " You have chosen the only 
 career in which a man is never old. A statesman can 
 feel and inspire interest longer than any other man." 
 A seat in the House of Commons does not, it is true, 
 make one a statesman. But as a general proposition, 
 Disraelfs declaration has much truth in it. There is 
 no doubt that old men seem to find the fountain of 
 youth in the halls of Parliament. Above all, however 
 disappointed a member may be in his dreams of personal 
 ambition, and in his schemes of pet legislation, there is 
 the ever-present and consoling thought that he exercises 
 a potent voice or perhaps I should say vote in the 
 Government of the greatest and mightiest Empire in 
 the world.
 
 79 
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 THE PALACE OF WESTMINSTER 
 
 MOST visitors to the Palace of Westminster reach it by 
 Whitehall or Victoria Street. This side of the noble 
 Gothic edifice, which contains the entrances to both 
 Houses of Parliament, is more picturesque but less im- 
 posing perhaps than the river front. The harmonious 
 inclusion of Westminster Hall the only overground 
 portion of the old Palace saved from the disastrous fire 
 of 1834 in the new edifice, enforced the breaking up 
 of this, the western or land front, into a variety of 
 facades, ending in the great Victoria Tower. The 
 light and shade produced by the blending of the 
 massive grey masonry of the Great Hall, with the soft 
 Gothic gracefulness of the new edifice, is very beautiful, 
 the effect being heightened by the close contiguity of 
 the venerable Abbey, and the fine open grassy space, 
 with its bright-hued flower-beds, and its statues of 
 great Victorian statesmen Sir Robert Peel, Lord 
 Palmerston, the Earl of Derby, and Lord Beaconsfield 
 which fronts the Palace. 
 
 But the most imposing view of this great temple of 
 legislation is obtained from the river. Standing beneath 
 the aged and hoary pile of Lambeth Palace and looking 
 across the broad waters of the Thames, especially when 
 that mighty waterway is at a full tide, one realises the
 
 80 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 full magnificence of the Palace of Westminster. The 
 grandeur of this splendid architectural triumph for 
 which we are indebted to the constructive genius of 
 Charles Barry, and the graceful fancy of Augustus 
 Welby Pugin grows upon you as you examine it in 
 detail. The stately regularity of the river facade, its 
 extent and uniform symmetry, the lightness, the grace, 
 the beauty of its stone carving, are most impressive. 
 At the nearer end is the Victoria Tower, standing 
 75 feet square, and rising to the gigantic elevation of 
 350 feet, surmounted by an immense flag-staff, from 
 which the Union Jack flies daily during the Session. 
 At the far end and abutting on Westminster Bridge, 
 rises the graceful Clock Tower containing " Big Ben," 
 while between is a picturesque variety of other towers 
 and spires and pinnacles. 
 
 There, is, probably, no feature of mighty London so 
 widely known in the metropolis, and also so familiar 
 by name at least in the provinces, as the famous 
 clock of the Houses of Parliament. No visitor to 
 London would think of returning home without having 
 seen " Big Ben," and heard him chiming the quarters, 
 and booming out the hour. During the summer season 
 hundreds of thousands of strangers from the provinces 
 and from far-off lands gaze up at his massive, honest 
 face, and then go home happy and contented. They 
 are proud and delighted to have made the acquaint- 
 ance of such a London celebrity as " Big Ben." 
 
 The tower in which " Big Ben " is housed is forty 
 feet square, and as its spire rises to a height of 3^0 feet, 
 it is the loftiest belfry in London. The clock tower of 
 the old Palace of Westminster stood on the same site; 
 The clock the old tower contained was known as " Tom
 
 THE PALACE OF WESTMINSTER 81 
 
 of Westminster."" A quaint and curious story is told 
 of its origin. It was built in the reign of Edward I., 
 and its expense was defrayed from a line imposed on 
 Ralph de Hingham, Chief Justice of England, because 
 of an unjust legal decision he delivered. " Its intent," 
 says an old chronicler, " was, by the clock striking con- 
 tinually, to remind the judges of the neighbouring 
 courts to administer true justice, they calling thereby 
 to mind the occasion and means of its building."" After 
 tin- tower was destroyed, the bell, "Tom of West- 
 minster," was given by William III. to the Dean and 
 Chapter of St. Paul's, and from its metal the great bell 
 of the national cathedral was cast. 
 
 The clock which is now known as " Big Ben "" for the 
 title has been transferred from the bell to the clock, or 
 rather embraces both was constructed under the direc- 
 tion of Sir G. B. Airy, K.C.B., late Astronomer Roval, 
 and cost ,- J 8734. It is the largest clock in the world. 
 Most of its works are of cast-iron. Each of the four 
 dials is 22^ feet in diameter, and each weighs about 
 four tons, exclusive of the heavy glass with which it is 
 gla/ed. The minute hands are fourteen feet in length, 
 and the hour hand, from the centre of the dial to its 
 extreme point, is six feet. The minute division of the 
 circumference of each dial measures fourteen inches. 
 Seventy-two gas jets are employed to light up the dials 
 at night. The time of the clock is set by electric com- 
 munication with Greenwich Observatory. The clock 
 has a large bell to toll the hours, and four smaller ones 
 to chime the quarters. The first large bell was called 
 " Big Ben," after Sir Benjamin Hall, who was First 
 Commissioner of Works when the Clock Tower was 
 erected. It weighed sixteen tons, and had a clapper
 
 82 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 weighing 12 cwt. After immense trouble, and a large 
 sum of money had been expended, this mighty bell was 
 swung in the belfry of the tower. But it was only a few 
 months in use when it cracked, and had to be taken down 
 again. The present " Big Ben " the second of his royal 
 line was placed in the Clock Tower in 1858. 
 
 The utmost pains were taken in the casting of the 
 bell to ensure a perfect tone. But the Rev. H. H. 
 Haweis, the well-known author of " Music and Morals," 
 has declared that, from a musical point of view, " Big 
 Ben"" is "a disgrace to the nation/' 1 That certainly is 
 rather rough on our dear old friend. 
 
 To think [writes Mr. Haweis] that the Lords and Com- 
 mons should have sat for thirty years under the hoarse, gong- 
 like roar of that brazen fiend and listened to the quarters 
 timing the dreary periods of Parliamentary oratory, with- 
 out any sense of shame or annoyance, and still dare to call 
 themselves the I'epresentatives of a musical people ! The 
 thing is absurd ! 
 
 But that is not all. Mr. Haweis declares that 
 whistling is a lost art among the youths of London. 
 He ascribes it to the corruption of the musical nature 
 of our youths, brought about by listening to " Big- 
 Ben " and his four discordant quarters ! 
 
 It is not generally known that the present " Big- 
 Ben" has met with the fate of his predecessor. IK 1 
 also has been cracked by his own clapper! For all 
 that, most people will agree that there are few things 
 more impressive than " Big Ben " booming out the hour 
 of twelve in his slow, measured, and solemn tones at 
 midnight, when the roar of the City is hushed iu 
 slumber.
 
 rill.- 1 . 1'ALACK OF \VKSTMI\STKU 83 
 
 Th< tower, particularly the stage in which the clock 
 is set, is embellished with the most delicate carving; and 
 surmounted, as it is, by a beautiful gilded lantern spire, 
 is a very imposing and handsome piece of architectural 
 work. During the Session of Parliament a brilliant 
 steady light, blazing from a lantern over " Big Ben"" 
 280 feet above the roadway may be seen at night in 
 most parts of the Metropolis. It indicates that the House 
 of Commons is sitting. So long as our representatives 
 are in conclave, the light flashes its white flame through 
 the darkness of the night. It vanishes the moment the 
 House adjourns. A wire runs from the apparatus con- 
 taining the light right down to a chamber beneath the 
 floor of the House of Commons. A man is stationed 
 there during the evening, and when the Speakers ques- 
 tion, "That this House do now adjourn," 1 " is agreed to, 
 he pulls a switch, which instantly extinguishes the light 
 on the Clock Tower. 
 
 It is true the present Palace of Westminster was 
 opened only forty-three years ago. But the site it 
 occupies is old historic ground. The associations of 
 the departed centuries still cluster round the place ; 
 and it is impossible to look upon these imposing build- 
 ings without a throbbing heart and a quickened pulse, 
 as the stirring scenes and episodes of the mighty past 
 enacted upon this very ground crowd upon the recollec- 
 tion. Here for centuries were not only the Houses of 
 Parliament, but the palaces of the Sovereigns ; and the 
 principal courts of justice of the realm. Canute the 
 Great, the first of the Danish kings who reigned by 
 right of conquest, from 1017 to 1035, was also the first 
 monarch to make his home by the pleasant waters of 
 the Thames, and amid the verdant pastures of AVest-
 
 84 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 minster. What his palace was like, we know not. It 
 was burned clown just before the Saxons regained the 
 throne again, in 1042, in the person of Edward the 
 Confessor. Edward, desiring to live near his beloved 
 Abbey, rebuilt the palace, and had it completed in 
 time to receive there, with lavish welcome, the Duke of 
 Normandy, who was destined to succeed him as 
 William the Conqueror, in 1066. Other Sovereigns 
 added to the buildings, but as these were almost com- 
 pletely destroyed by fire in 1512, early in the reign of 
 Henry VIII., that monarch allowed them to fall into 
 ruin and decay; and finally, in 1530, on the fall of 
 Cardinal Wolsey (Archbishop of York), he deserted the 
 Palace of Westminster for York House, to which he 
 gave the name of Whitehall. The Palace of West- 
 minster was never afterwards used as the metropolitan 
 residence of the Sovereigns of England. The Law 
 Courts were fixed at Westminster by Edward I. 
 towards the end of the thirteenth century. The judges 
 presided in Westminster Hall until 1738. In that year 
 new buildings, off the Hall on its west side, were 
 opened for their accommodation, and here the courts 
 were held until 1880, when the new Palace of Justice 
 in the Strand was completed. 
 
 But it is with Parliament that Westminster is most 
 closely associated. For six centuries now Westminster 
 has been the seat of Parliament. Edward I., "the 
 great law giver," issued a special summons to the pre- 
 lates, and to the nobles then consisting of seven earls, 
 and forty-one barons to meet him in council ; while 
 to the sheriffs of each county writs were sent, bidding 
 them to cause the election of two knights for each 
 shire, two citizens for each city, two burgesses for each
 
 THE PALACE OF WESTMINSTER 85 
 
 borough ; and thus, for the first time, the representa- 
 tive principle was recognised in calling together an 
 assembly of the magnates and wise men of the realm. 
 This Parliament met at Westminster on November 27, 
 1295. It has been truly named the Great or Model 
 Parliament. For close on a century the three estates 
 of the realm the prelates, the nobles, and the com- 
 mons deliberated together as one Common Council. 
 The division of Parliament into two Houses one for 
 the Lords, spiritual and temporal, and the other for 
 the Commons ; both, however, forming the one Legis- 
 lature, with the Sovereign at its head took place in 
 1377, the last year of the reign of Edward III. The 
 Commons, having elected Sir William Hungerford as 
 their first Speaker, assembled in the Chapter House of 
 Westminster Abbey. Their next place of meeting was 
 Westminster Hall, within which the Courts of Law 
 then also sat, and finally St. Stephen's Chapel was 
 assigned to them by Edward VI. in 1550. 
 
 This edifice continued to be used by the House of 
 Commons till it was destroved in the fire of 1834. It 
 
 / 
 
 was built by Edward III. after his succession to the 
 throne in 1327, on the ruins of the original St. Stephen's 
 Chapel, which was raised by King Stephen in 1135 and 
 dedicated by him to the first Christian martyr. Edward's 
 Chapel was in the beautiful Gothic of the period, and 
 Italian artists were brought to London to adorn its 
 walls with historical and religious frescoes. After the 
 Reformation, when the chapel was transferred from the 
 Church to the Crown, and from the Crown to the House 
 of Commons, these Papistical mural paintings, were, in a 
 fit of Puritanical zeal, covered over with a plain, decorous 
 wainscot, which in the gay times of Charles II. was in
 
 86 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 turn hid behind rich tapestry hangings. When two 
 side galleries were added by Sir Christopher Wren in 
 1706, shortly after the Union with Scotland, the tapes- 
 tries disappeared, and the Chamber underwent a final 
 transformation in 1800, when, as a result of the Union 
 with Ireland, seats for one hundred additional members 
 had to be found. The old wainscot was then taken 
 down ; and although the paintings of the Italian artists 
 of the fourteenth century were found to be in a perfect 
 state of preservation, they, too, were destroyed to make 
 room for the required two extra lines of benches. The 
 useful was evidently deemed of more account than the 
 ornamental. There were now five rows of benches on 
 either side, divided as in the present Chamber by a 
 gangway. The Speaker's Chair was at the top of the 
 Chamber where the altar originally stood. It was a 
 carved oak armchair surmounted with the royal arms 
 of England, and below it, as now, was the table with 
 three clerks. 
 
 The old House of Lords, like the old House of 
 Commons, was an oblong chamber with rows of benches 
 running up from the floor to the walls. On the walls 
 hung tapestries divided into compartments by oak 
 frames, each containing a representation of a scene from 
 the defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588, and sur- 
 mounted by portraits of the officers who commanded 
 the English fleet in that perilous time. They were the 
 gifts of the States of Holland to Queen Elizabeth. The 
 Throne on which sat all the Sovereigns of England from 
 1550 to 1834 from Edward VI. to William IV. was 
 at the top of the Chamber. It was a carved gilt arm- 
 chair on a dais. The seat was lined with crimson velvet; 
 two gilt Corinthian pillars supported a canopy, also of
 
 THE PALACE OF WESTMINSTER 87 
 
 crimson velvet, and the whole was surmounted by a 
 crown. 
 
 Between the two Houses lay the Painted Chamber, a 
 survival of the original Palace erected by Edward the 
 Confessor, who indeed used it as a sleeping apartment 
 and died there. Its walls were painted with battle 
 scenes by Henry III. in the middle of the thirteenth 
 century, and hence its name. Here the court before 
 which Charles I. was arraigned, sat for the concluding 
 duvs of the trial. Here Oliver Cromwell and Henry 
 Martin blacked each other's faces in fun, like giddy 
 young schoolboys, as they signed the warrant which 
 condemned the King to the headsman's axe. The 
 Chamber was also used for conferences between repre- 
 sentatives of both Houses with a view to arriving at a 
 compromise in regard to Bills about which they differed. 
 At these meetings the Lords were seated and wore their 
 hats, while the Commons had to stand uncovered. 
 There is a Painted Chamber for the same uses in the 
 present Palace, but the procedure was practically 
 abolished in 1851, when it was agreed both by Lords 
 and Commons that statements respecting differences of 
 opinion on any Bill, or other proceeding, might be com- 
 municated to either House by message from the other, 
 and that no conference need take place unless specially 
 requested. 
 
 The old pile was historically of great interest, but 
 the buildings had no pretensions to architectural 
 beauty. "A confused and ill-formed assemblage of 
 towers, turrets and pinnacles, jumbled together without 
 taste or judgment," they appeared just before they were 
 destroyed by fire. In truth the old Houses of Parlia- 
 ment were a mass of patchwork, added to from time to
 
 88 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 time without any order or regularity, as fire now ravaged 
 one wing and then another. In the multiplicity of the 
 features of the pile there was no unity. Internally the 
 Houses were also uncommodious and confined ; but " the 
 fathers of the nation"" never relished the idea of pulling 
 them down to give place to buildings of nobler pro- 
 portions. In the very last Session of the House of 
 Commons that was held in St. Stephen's Chapel, Joseph 
 Hume proposed, not for the first time, that new Houses 
 of Parliament should be erected, but the motion was not 
 accepted. Four or five months later, as the buildings 
 were enveloped in a mass of flames, one of the spectators 
 wittily cried out : " There is Joe Hume's motion being 
 carried without a division." 
 
 The great conflagration which caused the final destruc- 
 tion of the ancient Palace took place on October 16, 1834. 
 The Whig Ministry under Earl Grey, which had carried 
 the Reform Act of 1832, broke up in July on the ques- 
 tion of appropriating a portion of the revenues of the 
 Church in Ireland to secular purposes, and were succeeded 
 by another Whig administration with Lord Melbourne 
 as Prime Minister. Parliament was prorogued on 
 August 15, by King William IV. in person. It was to 
 meet again on October 23. When that day came, the 
 old Palace of Westminster no longer existed. 
 
 The fire originated in an attempt to get rid of the 
 tallies, or notched sticks, which, incredible as it may 
 seem, had been used in the Exchequer as receipts for 
 .sums paid in by the Revenue departments as late a^ 
 1826. This rude mode of keeping accounts was intro- 
 duced into England in 1066 by the Normans. Short 
 rods of hazel and willow were obtained in large quan- 
 tities by the Exchequer. On one edge of each rod
 
 THE PALACE OF WESTMINSTER 89 
 
 notches indicating the sum for which it was an acknow- 
 ledgment a penny, a shilling, a pound, ten, one hundred, 
 and a thousand pounds being indicated by the width of 
 the notch and on each side of the rod was inscribed the 
 sum in Roman characters, with the naine of the debtor 
 and the date of the transaction. The rod was then 
 split longitudinally ; one piece was given to the debtor 
 as a receipt and the other was preserved by the Ex- 
 chequer as a record. An Act was passed in 1783 for 
 the abolition of this svsteni of issuing Exchequer tallies, 
 but despite the existence of pens, ink and paper, and of 
 accountants and actuaries, it continued in use till 1826. 
 An immense quantity of tallies had accumulated for a 
 long series of years and were stowed away in the luni- 
 IX.T rooms of every Government office at Westminster 
 and Whitehall. A large pile of them was burnt in 
 Tothill h'elds in 1826, some were used from time to 
 time as firewood by servants of the State apartments, 
 and on the morning of October 16, 1834, two workmen 
 proceeded to get rid of several cartloads that still 
 remained, by burning them in the stove of the flues by 
 which the House of Lords was heated. 
 
 All day long the men were engaged feeding the 
 stove with tallies. At five o 1 clock they went home, 
 their work still unfinished. At half-past six the House 
 of Lords was in a blaze, the heat from the overcharged 
 flues having ignited the panelling of the walls; and, 
 despite the efforts of the firemen, the flames soon spread 
 over the whole extensive pile of buildings. When 
 morning dawned, the old Palace of Westminster, which 
 had echoed with the eloquence of generations of great 
 statesmen, was a hideous mass of smouldering ruins. A 
 blackened, tottering wall still stood here and there, but
 
 90 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 the only section of the Palace rescued from destruction 
 was old Westminster Hall, a hall for ever associated 
 with great men and historic deeds. The richly vaulted 
 crypt beneath the St. Stephen's Chapel (or the House of 
 Commons), which since 1800 had been used as a dining- 
 room by the Speaker, also escaped, protected as it was 
 by its solid roof. 
 
 The Rolls of Parliament containing the signatures of 
 members were the most valuable of the vast quantity of 
 documents destroyed, for most of the others, happily, 
 were printed. The table of the House of Commons, 
 which was provided by Sir Christopher Wren in 1706, 
 and at which Pitt, Fox, Canning, and Peel spoke, was 
 found in the ruins almost uninjured. It is now preserved 
 in the members'* tea-room. Another interesting relic of 
 the old Palace reposes under a glass case in the library 
 of the House of Commons. This is the key which, at 
 the commencement of every Session before the fire of 
 1834, was used to unlock the vaults of the old Houses 
 of Parliament for their annual inspection by the Yeomen 
 of the Guard, which has taken place uninterruptedly 
 since the discovery of Guy Fawkes with his kegs of 
 powder under the House of Lords, on November 5, 
 1605. The key is about sixteen inches long, and is of 
 very curious and ingenious construction. It was found 
 in the ruins a few days after the fire. A relic of even 
 greater historical interest was also discovered in the 
 subsequent searches among the debris of the conflagra- 
 tion, namely, the original warrant for the execution 
 of Charles I., with the signatures of the fiftv-tlnvr 
 persons who formed the court, the name of Bradakawe, 
 the president, heading the list. It hung, framed and 
 glazed, in the peers 1 library before the fire. It is now
 
 THE PALACE OF WESTMINSTER 91 
 
 preserved in the iie\v library. These, however, were the 
 only things rescued from the ruins. Everything else, 
 including the Throne in the House of Lords, the Chair 
 in the House of Commons, was destroyed. 
 
 On October 23rd the t\vo Houses met for a brief and 
 formal sitting, the Lords assembling within the charred 
 walls of their library, which was temporarily fitted up 
 with a Throne and Woolsack, and the Commons in an 
 adjoining committee-room. It was decided to tempo- 
 rarily fit up the House of Lords for the use of the Com- 
 mons, and the Tainted Chamber for the use of the Lords ; 
 and a sum of ,30,000 was voted for the purpose. 
 Commissioners were also appointed to superintend the 
 construction of a new Palace of Westminster. Parlia- 
 ment then adjourned. On November 14th, King 
 William dismissed the Melbourne Ministry, and Sir 
 Robert Peel was commanded to form a new Adminis- 
 tration. On the advice of the Prime Minister, the King 
 dissolved Parliament on December 29th, and the new 
 Parliament met on February 19, 1835, in the tem- 
 porary buildings, which continued to be used till the 
 completion of the present Palace of Westminster. 
 
 The design of the new Houses of Parliament was left 
 open to general competition. The only condition laid 
 dow n was that the style of the building should be either 
 Gothic or Elizabethan. As many as ninety-seven sets 
 of designs were received. The Commissioners, after 
 much consultation, selected, in 1836, the plan of Mr. 
 Charles Barry, R.A., who was born in 1795, the son of 
 a stationer in Bridge Street, opposite the Houses of 
 Parliament, and who grew to manhood under the 
 shadow of the old Palace of Westminster. Barry 
 was assisted in superintending the building and internal
 
 92 
 
 decoration of the Palace a work in which the genius of 
 the greatest artists of the day was enlisted by Augustus 
 Welby Pugin, another eminent architect and authority 
 on Gothic architecture. But in 1867, when both 
 architects had long been dead, the eldest son of Pugin, 
 who succeeded to his father's practice as an architect, 
 declared in a correspondence in the Times that he was 
 in possession of proof to establish his father's claim a>> 
 the actual architect of the Palace of Westminster, and 
 he afterwards published a book on the subject. 
 
 The buildings were not commenced until 1840. The 
 selection of the stone for the structure was a matter 
 that received the anxious consideration of the Commis- 
 sioners. Finally the hard magnesian limestone from 
 Anston, in Yorkshire, was selected for the exterior of 
 the building, and Caen stone for the interior. Then, 
 on April 27, 1840, the first stone it may be seen 
 in the south-east angle of the plinth of the Speaker's 
 house was laid without any public ceremony. Exactly 
 seven years later in April, 1847 the House of Lords 
 was used for the first time ; and at the commencement 
 of the Session of 1852 the House of Commons and 
 most of the public portions of the edifice were opened. 
 Over two millions sterling were expended on the build- 
 ing and decoration of the Palace. Barry received the 
 honour of knighthood on the completion of his great 
 work in 1852. He died in 1860, and was buried in 
 Westminster Abbey. A marble effigy of the distin- 
 guished architect stands at the foot of the staircase 
 leading from the Central Hall to the committee-rooms' 1 
 corridor. 
 
 The Palace of Westminster, covering as it does an 
 area of nine acres, is the largest Gothic structure in the
 
 THE PALACE OF WESTMINSTER 93 
 
 world. Eleven courtyards give light and air to the 
 six hundred rooms and apartments contained in the 
 vast pile. In the very heart of the edifice is the great 
 Central Hall, above which rises a beautiful tower 
 terminating in a spire ; and right and left of the Hall 
 are the two Houses of Parliament the Commons' 1 
 Chamber nearer to Big Ben, the Lords 1 Chamber nearer 
 to the Victoria Tower while about them lie the retiring 
 rooms of their respective members and the homes of 
 their principal officers. There used to be eleven official 
 residences in the Palace. In recent times the number 
 has been reduced, and the tendency is to reduce it still 
 further on every available occasion, in order to provide 
 more accommodation for members. Each Minister has a 
 private room in the corridors at the back of the Speaker's 
 Chair, in which he may read and write letters and 
 despatches, and receive business visitors when his presence 
 is not required in the House. Members of the Adminis- 
 tration have also an exclusive entrance into the Palace. 
 Private rooms are at the disposal of the Unionist, 
 Liberal, and Nationalist " Whips," but apart from these 
 officers of parties, the only member of the House, not in 
 the Government, who has a private room is the Leader 
 of the Opposition. The demand for rooms where un- 
 official members may receive deputations from their 
 constituents has grown in recent years, and has only 
 been met to some extent. 
 
 ' Indeed the needs of the ever-expanding business of 
 the House of Commons have already put to an acute 
 strain the accommodation afforded by the extensive and 
 sumptuous Palace of Westminster. The Sessions have 
 necessarily grown considerably longer since the Palace 
 was opened in 1852. Parliament usually meets for the
 
 ".4 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Session about the middle of January or early in Feb- 
 ruary. The time at which it prorogues is uncertain. It 
 fluctuates a good deal. Until ten or fifteen years ago it 
 was the first week in August just in time to allow its 
 members to get away to the grouse moors. Lately it 
 has been the end of August, or the middle of September. 
 The mode of transacting business has also changed. 
 
 Up to Easter [remarks the " Father of the House," in 
 one of Disraeli's political novels speaking in 1842 of a 
 time just anterior to the Reform Act of 1 83S] we rarely 
 had a regular debate, never a party division ; very few 
 people came up indeed. But there was a good deal of 
 speaking on all subjects befoi*e dinner. We had the privi- 
 lege then of speaking on the presentation of petitions at 
 any length, and we seldom spoke on any other occasion. 
 After Easter there was always at least one great party fight. 
 This was a mighty affair, talked of for weeks before it came 
 off, and then rarely an adjourned debate. After this party 
 fight the House for the rest of the Session was a mere 
 
 club The House of Commons was very much like 
 
 what the House of Lords is now. 
 
 Parliament has in every respect undergone a complete 
 revolution since then. Nowadays the House of Commons 
 is more of a workshop than a club to most of its 
 members. 
 
 Crowds of new members, therefore, make their way to 
 Westminster during the week or so that elapses between 
 the close of the General Election and the opening of 
 the new Parliament, in order to make themselves 
 acquainted with the structural arrangements of the 
 Palace, in which they will have to spend so much of 
 their time. It is obviously impossible for the door- 
 keepers or the policemen on duty to be able to dis-
 
 THE PALACE OF WESTMINSTER 95 
 
 criminate at first between those who say they are 
 members and those who may be strangers. With the 
 view of identifying the new members, the doorkeepers 
 and policemen will carry in their pockets for weeks 
 small books in which they have pasted the photographs 
 of the new-comers, cut out of the illustrated papers. 
 They will refer to this improvised album, in which the 
 portraits are arranged alphabetically, whenever they see 
 a stranger in the lobbies, and if they have any doubt as 
 to his identity, he will promptly be asked his name. It 
 is remarkable how quickly the attendants come to 
 identify the new members. 
 
 It is remarkable also how soon the new members 
 make themselves at home in the quarters of the Palace 
 devoted exclusively to the Commons. There is, indeed, 
 a story told of a member who was in the House of 
 Commons for six years before he discovered there was 
 such a place as the Terrace. But that was long ere 
 the Terrace reached its present eminent position as a 
 great social institution. As a rule a new member is not 
 many hours in the Palace of Westminster before he has 
 secured a locker, to which each member is entitled, for 
 books and papers ; smoked a pipe or cigar in the smok- 
 ing-room, reclining in the armchair which was Mr. 
 Gladstone's favourite seat when at Downing Street ; 
 had dinner in one or other of the dining-rooms ; read 
 the newspapers in the reading-room, or made himself 
 acquainted with the contents of its extensive book- 
 shelves; strolled on the Terrace; had tea in the tea- 
 room at the table of the old House of Commons ; and 
 dispatched numbers of letters from the House to his 
 relatives and friends giving his impressions of the great 
 Palace of Westminster.
 
 CHAPTER V 
 OPENING OF A NEW PARLIAMENT 
 
 BUT members will not have entered into the full pos- 
 session of their heritage as the chosen representatives 
 of the people until they have actually taken their seats 
 in the House of Commons and that, of course, they 
 cannot do until the new Parliament has been duly 
 opened. The day for the assembling of the new Parlia- 
 ment is fixed in the proclamation dissolving the old. 
 Members know that date well. They all await it 
 eagerly, whether they belong to the " ins n or to the 
 " outs," and by the new members members who have 
 not been in Parliament before it is probably regarded 
 as the most memorable of the red-letter days of their 
 lives. The newspapers, too, are full of the date. It is 
 mentioned over and over again in the editorial columns 
 and in the news columns. But, nevertheless, it is the 
 custom for the chiefs of the political parties in both 
 Houses of the Legislature to issue as at the opening 
 of an ordinary Session a lithographed letter to their 
 respective followers, calling attention to the date on 
 which Parliament is to assemble, and expressing the 
 hope that they will find it. convenient to attend in their 
 places on that day. 
 
 Two o'clock is always the hour fixed for the statelv 
 and picturesque ceremony of the opening of Parlia-
 
 OPENING OF A NEW PARLIAMENT 97 
 
 ment. Some members, eager for the distinction of 
 having their names prominently mentioned in the news- 
 paper reports, put in an appearance at Westminster at 
 the cold grey dawn of the day. On the morning of 
 August 12, 1895 the day on which the fourteenth 
 Parliament of Queen Victoria, and the twenty-sixth 
 since the Union of Great Britain and Ireland in 1800, 
 was opened one representative arrived before six 
 o'clock. No doubt he deemed himself well recom- 
 pensed for the physical discomfort entailed by his early 
 visit when he saw it recorded in the Press that to him 
 was due the distinction of having been first on the 
 scene. But the bulk of members prefer to breakfast 
 first before they go down to Westminster, elbowing 
 their way often through the crowd of sight-seers that 
 throng the approaches to the Palace; and it is not 
 until between eleven and twelve o'clock that there is 
 any real competition for seats in the Chamber, which, 
 curiously enough, accommodates only about half the 670 
 representatives returned to the House of Commons. 
 
 But long before noon an interesting preliminary to 
 the ceremony of opening Parliament is carried out. 
 This is the ancient custom of searching the vaults 
 beneath the Palace of Westminster, on the first day of 
 a new Session. The chief inspector of police at the 
 House of Commons, and the inspector at the House of 
 Lords, with four Queen's marshalmen, a sergeant-major, 
 and ten Yeomen of her Majesty's Bodyguard, or the 
 Guards of the Tower of London, popularly known as 
 " beefeaters " clad in the quaint and picturesque uni- 
 forms which have survived from the days of the Tudors 
 assemble in the Princes Chamber at ten and, on the 
 arrival of the Lord Chamberlain and Black Rod, form
 
 98 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 a procession, and march through the whole of the ex- 
 tensive basement of both Houses of Parliament. This 
 searching of the vaults originated after the attempt of 
 Guy Fawkes to blow up the two Houses and their 
 members in the days of James I. Such is the un- 
 willingness of Parliament to part with any of its time- 
 honoured ceremonies such the length to which it 
 carries its reverence for precedent and tradition that 
 this custom has survived for nearly three centuries, and 
 will probably last as long as Parliament itself. The 
 function, as a search, is now a work of supererogation. 
 No one is admitted to the vaults without an order from 
 the Board of Works, and the few visitors to these 
 wonderful and widely extending basements are natur- 
 ally closely watched by police. Needless, then, to say, 
 the quest never results in the discovery of anything 
 inimical to the well-being of legislators or the safety of 
 the Palace of Westminster. The directions for the con- 
 ducting of the search, drawn up close on three hundred 
 years ago, are still followed almost to the very letter. 
 It is ordered that no one but the officials engaged in 
 the duty shall be present. The ceremony consequently 
 has never been witnessed by even the ubiquitous news- 
 paper reporter of to-day, who probably has seen every 
 other spectacle, function, and ceremony in the kingdom. 
 It is enjoined that lanterns are to be supplied to 
 the searchers, and this injunction is still obeyed. Each 
 of the Yeomen of the Guard carries a lantern in 
 his hand, although the daylight streams bright and 
 clear through these subterranean passages. But the 
 lanterns are not lighted. The ancient directions men- 
 tion "lanterns'" only not "lighted lanterns" and 
 therefore, when the present Houses, with their well-
 
 OPENING OF A NEW PARLIAMENT 99 
 
 lit basements, were erected, the authorities decided 
 having given, no doubt, the proposed innovation their 
 most careful and anxious consideration that the lan- 
 terns need no longer carry lights. 
 
 But let us see how matters are progressing in the 
 House of Commons. By one o'clock every seat in the 
 Chamber is appropriated. A member usually secures 
 a seat by placing his hat upon it. According to the 
 rules and regulations of the House, it must be his real 
 working hat, and not a colourable substitute. This 
 means that if a member were to bring two hats with 
 him, and were to leave the House for a walk in the 
 streets, he would forfeit all right to the seat on which 
 he had placed the second hat. Members must, there- 
 fore, stay within " the precincts of the House "" which 
 means within the Palace of Westminster no matter 
 how early they may have made their appearance there, 
 on important occasions like the opening of a new 
 Parliament. But the opening of the fourteenth Par- 
 liament of Queen Victoria in August, 1895, was marked 
 by an important innovation. Members were enabled 
 to leave in lieu of their hats, large white cards 
 containing their names, on seats which they desired 
 to appropriate. This change in a long-established 
 practice owes its origin to the influenza epidemic during 
 the Autumn Session of 1893, when a large number of 
 members were stricken with the malady. As the 
 chance of a member being successfully attacked by the 
 mighty microbe was much increased by his going 
 about uncovered in the corridors of the House, Mr. 
 Speaker Peel directed that white cards might be used 
 to secure seats, so that the hats could be worn by their 
 owners instead of being left on the benches. Seats
 
 100 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 are consequently now retained in the Chamber, at the 
 opening of Parliament, by cards. 
 
 The new members meanwhile occupy the time before 
 the opening of the proceedings by roaming over the 
 precincts of the House, visiting the library, the smoking- 
 rooms, the dining-rooms, the Terrace, the reading-rooms, 
 and the other comfortable club quarters of the Palace 
 of Westminster at the disposal of legislators when en- 
 gaged in making the laws. At a quarter to two the 
 members crowd into the Chamber again. What a 
 number of strange faces are in the throng ! It is easy 
 to distinguish the new members by the eager look of 
 curiosity and wonder, not unmixed with triumph, with 
 which they gaze on every feature of the great historic 
 Chamber, follow every movement of the officials, and 
 the shyness with which they cheer, or indulge in forms 
 of applause unfamiliar in the House, such as the 
 clapping of hands, as their leaders appear, one by 
 one, in the Chamber, and take their places on the 
 two front benches. But this shyness soon disappears. 
 There is a story told that an old member was thus 
 addressed by a new member at the opening of a new 
 Parliament : " If you please, sir, where do the members 
 for boroughs sit ? " The incident was related to 
 Disraeli, who was much diverted. " Yes ! " said he, 
 " and in three months we shall have that member 
 bawling and bellowing and making such a row, there 
 will be no holding him ! " 
 
 At two o'clock the Clerk, who acts as moderator of 
 the Chamber until a Speaker is elected, quietly takes 
 his seat at the table. The mace is brought in from 
 the back of the Chair by the Speaker's train-bearer (not 
 by the Serjeaut-at-Arms, who carries it on every other
 
 OPENING OF A \E\V PARLIAMENT 101 
 
 occasion), and is placed under the table, instead of on 
 the table, where it rests when the House is sitting and 
 Mr. Speaker is in the Chair. The Commons are now 
 assembled, but the House has not yet been constituted. 
 It will not be constitutionally formed until the Speaker 
 is elected and the members have taken the oath of 
 allegiance; and members can only subscribe the oath 
 after the Speaker has been chosen, and his election has 
 received the approbation of the Sovereign. Meml)ers 
 are therefore in a rather anomalous position. One of 
 the rules of the House enjoins that a member who votes 
 without having taken the oath of allegiance shall 
 thereby vacate his seat, and subject himself also to a 
 penalty of 500. There is one exception. If there is 
 a contest for the Chair, the rule does not apply. The 
 election of a Speaker at the opening of a new Parliament 
 is the only matter upon which an unsworn member can 
 record his vote. 
 
 The first duty, therefore, of the Commons is to elect 
 a Speaker. Few of the ceremonies of Parliament are 
 more quaint and curious than this election. In the first 
 place, the Commons, according to the theory of the 
 ( 'onstitution, cannot proceed with the election without 
 the consent of the Sovereign, and that consent is given 
 them as they stand at the Bar of the House of Lords. 
 But there was one election of Speaker for which the 
 royal sanction was not obtained. The frequent attacks 
 of mental derangement from which George III. suffered 
 in the course of his long reign produced some awkward 
 constitutional complications. Happily a way was found 
 out of them all. During the King's illness in 1788, the 
 question of the appointment of the Prince of Wales as 
 Regent, to exercise the prerogatives of the Crown, was
 
 102 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 made more perplexing by the death of Mr. Speaker 
 Cornwall. His Majesty could neither signify his leave 
 for the election of a new Speaker, nor approve the 
 choice of the Commons for the Chair. But a simple 
 expedient for getting rid of this Constitutional difficulty 
 was adopted. Parliament dispensed on that occasion 
 with these customary formalities. 
 
 The Commons now await the summons of " Black 
 Rod " to proceed to the House of Lords. The benches 
 on each side of the House of Commons and the long 
 side galleries are crowded with members ; and still a 
 large number are unable, as yet, to obtain that " seat 
 in the House "" for which they fought so desperately 
 during the General Election. Many have perforce to 
 stand during the ceremonies. Nevertheless the best of 
 good humour prevails. Congratulations pass from 
 member to member, irrespective of part}' ; even old 
 opponents shake hands and express the mutual pleasure 
 they feel that they have not been laid low in the General 
 Election ; and an occasional hearty burst of laughter 
 denotes that a good story perhaps some electioneering 
 experience is being told to an appreciative auditorv. 
 
 Suddenly the animated buz/ of conversation and the 
 jokes and laughter are stilled in the Chamber by a sten- 
 torian cry of " Black Rod." It comes from the door- 
 keeper in the lobby outside. Presently " Black Rod," 
 who is the messenger of the House of Lords, appeal's in 
 the Chamber. He is in court dress. He walks slowly 
 up the floor, bearing in his right hand a short ebony 
 rod tipped with gold, the emblem of his office ; in 
 his left he carries his cocked-hat, while a sword 
 dangles by his side. Some of the new members 
 appear to think that they must receive " Black Rod "
 
 OPENING OF A NEW PARLIAMENT 103 
 
 standing. Many of them rise to their feet ; but they 
 are told to sit down again by the old members. Mem- 
 bers only stand when Mr. Speaker walks up or down the 
 floor, or when a message from the Sovereign is being 
 read to the House. On reaching the table " Black Hod " 
 invites the House to repair to the House of Lords. 
 The actual terms of his message are : " The Lords 
 authorised to open Parliament by virtue of her Majesty's 
 Royal Commission desire the immediate attendance of 
 your honourable House in the House of Peers, to hear the 
 Commission read."" And as he delivers it he looks first at 
 the Government benches and then at the benches of the 
 Opposition. After this "Black Rod" retreats back- 
 wards down the floor to the Bar, where he waits until 
 joined by the Clerk, and the two then walk across the 
 intervening lobbies to the House of Lords, followed by 
 a crowd of new members, shoving and jostling each 
 other in their desire to secure good places in the " Gilded 
 Chamber." 
 
 " Gilded Chamber," indeed ! It is a most appropriate 
 description of the House of Lords, with its gorgeous 
 colouring in which gold predominates. Many a new 
 member of the House of Commons must have been sur- 
 prised to see, at the opening of a new Parliament, the 
 red morocco benches on the Opposition side of the 
 House occupied by a large number of ladies. But that 
 is customary in the Lords at the close as well as at the 
 opening of a Session. The Lords do not shut up in a 
 cage the ladies who grace the House with their presence 
 as the Commons do. All the galleries in the Chamber 
 are open. The side galleries are exclusively reserved 
 for peeresses and the daughters of peers. In the gallery 
 for " strangers " ladies and gentlemen sit together, and,
 
 104 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 as we see, the Lords are pleased to allow ladies on an 
 important and interesting ceremonial occasion to sit 
 beside them on the benches. These ladies are not 
 peeresses or the daughters of peers, but ordinary 
 " strangers,' 1 who secured the necessary orders for 
 admission from some of the Lords. It is usual for 
 the leading members of both the Government and the 
 Opposition to absent themselves on the day Parliament 
 is opened. 
 
 The first thing that arrests the eye of the spectator 
 is the Throne, emblazoned with the royal arms, on a 
 dais at the top of the Chamber. It is not occupied ; 
 but seated on a bench beneath the Throne, all in a row, 
 are five Lords arrayed in ample red robes, slashed with 
 ermine or white fur, and having on their heads quaint 
 three-cornered beaver hats. These are the Lords Com- 
 missioners, to whom the Queen delegates her authority, 
 when her Majesty is not present in person. The central 
 figure, who is distinguished by wearing a three-cornered 
 hat different in shape from the others, is the Lord 
 Chancellor. 
 
 When the Commons have appeared at the Bar, 
 headed by the Clerk, the Lord Chancellor, without 
 rising from his seat or even lifting his hat, addresses the 
 members of the two Houses of the Legislature in the 
 following prescribed words : 
 
 My Lords and Gentlemen of the House of Commons, 
 Her Majesty, not thinking fit to be present here to-day in 
 her royal person, hath been pleased, in order to the open- 
 ing and holding of this Parliament, to cause Letters Patent 
 to be issued under the Great Seal, constituting us and 
 several other Lords therein named her Commissioners to do 
 all things in her Majesty's name, on her part necessary to
 
 OPENING OF A NEW PARLIAMENT 105 
 
 be performed in this Parliament, and this will more fully 
 appear by the Letters Patent themselves, which will now 
 be read. 
 
 The Letters Patent are then read by one of the Clerks 
 of the Table. They are engrossed on a long parchment 
 document, from which an impression of the Great Seal in 
 red wax hangs by a plaited silken cord, and set forth in 
 the quaint elaborate diction in which all important State 
 proclamations are couched, that the five Lords Commis- 
 sioners, whose names are set forth according to their pre- 
 cedence in the peerage and are described as " Our right 
 trusty and right entirely beloved cousins and councillors " 
 have the royal authority for the opening of Parliament. 
 The voice of the Lord Chancellor is again heard. He 
 says : 
 
 My Lords and Gentlemen, We have it in command 
 from her Majesty to let you know that her Majesty will, 
 as soon as the members of your Houses shall be sworn, 
 declare the causes of her calling this Parliament ; and it 
 being necessary that a Speaker of the House of Commons 
 shall be first chosen, it is her Majesty's pleasure that you, 
 gentlemen of the House of Commons, repair to the place 
 where you are to sit and there proceed to the choice of 
 some proper person to be your Speaker, and that you pre- 
 sent such person whom you shall so choose here to-morrow 
 at twelve o'clock for her Majesty's royal approbation. 
 
 Then without a word having been spoken on their side, 
 the Clerk and the members of the House of Commons 
 return to their Chamber. 
 
 The election of Speaker is at once proceeded with in 
 the House of Commons. The Chief Clerk again presides. 
 He occupies his own seat at the table, and not the
 
 106' THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 high-canopied Chair of the Speaker immediately behind. 
 The mace is still invisible. The Speaker, who must 
 be the representative of a constituency in the House of 
 Commons, is usually re-elected unanimously on the 
 assembling of a new Parliament. The motion for his 
 re-election, or to be precise, that he " do take the Chair 
 of this House as Speaker,"" is made by a prominent 
 unofficial member on the Government side of the House, 
 and seconded by a prominent unofficial member on the 
 Opposition side. Ministers take no part in this portion 
 of the ceremony. 
 
 The Clerk must not speak a word on this occasion. 
 All he can do is to rise from his seat and point with 
 outstretched finger at the member who, according to 
 previous arrangement, is to propose the candidate for 
 the Chair ; and later on he indicates in a similar fashion 
 the member who is to second the motion. The motion 
 is not put in the ordinary course. The Clerk does not, 
 for instance, say : " The question is that William Court 
 Gully do take the Chair of this House as Speaker." 
 The Commons express their unanimous approval of the 
 motion by cheers. If, however, there is a contest for 
 the Speakership the procedure is different. The candi- 
 date who is supported by the Government of the day is 
 first proposed and seconded, after which the candidate 
 of the Opposition is similarly put forward. The question 
 that the first candidate proposed or the Government 
 nominee do take the chair as Speaker is then put by 
 the Chief Clerk in the usual way, and, with the proposers 
 and seconders acting as tellers, a division is taken. 
 According to usage, each candidate votes for his rival in 
 the division. If the majority be in favour of the 
 member first proposed, he is elected ; but if otherwise,
 
 OPENING OF A NEW PARLIAMENT 107 
 
 a similar question is put in relation to the other 
 candidate, which, being earned, makes him Speaker 
 Elect. When the Speaker has been duly elected, 
 whether unanimously or by a majority on a division, he 
 rises in his place and addresses the House in a brief 
 speech of thanks, which is greeted by a loud cheer. The 
 applause indicates that he is " called," as the regulations 
 say, to the Chair. His proposer and seconder then catch 
 him each by the hands and conduct him up the narrow 
 path between the Treasury bench and the table to the 
 Chair. 
 
 In one important respect time has altered the details 
 of this quaint part of the ceremony. In the long, long 
 ago, it was the custom of the Speaker Designate to 
 protest with emphatic expostulations and adjurations 
 that of all the House he was most unsuited for the post. 
 A curious illustration of the custom comes down to us 
 from the days of Queen Elizabeth. The House having 
 met for the choice of a Speaker, Sir William Knowles 
 suggested Mr. Serjeant Yelverton for the office. "I 
 know him,"" said Sir William, " to be a man wise and 
 learned, secret and circumspect, religious and faithful, 
 every way able to supply the place." The whole House 
 cried, " Aye, aye, aye, let him be Speaker ! " Then the 
 modest, blushing Serjeant Yelverton rose. He said he 
 could not account for their choice of him for the office, 
 for he lacked merit, ability, and wealth. He was a poor 
 man, with a large family too. Nor was he of a suffi- 
 ciently portly presence. He that supplied that place 
 ought to be a big man, comely and stately, well-spoken, 
 his voice great, his carriage majestical, his nature 
 haughty, and his purse plentiful and heavy. But, con- 
 trarily, he was of a small body, not well-spoken, his voice
 
 108 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 low, his carriage lawyer-like and of the common fashion, 
 his nature soft and bashful, and his purse thin, light, 
 and never plentiful. The House was so enraptured with 
 these humble protestations that it elected the modest 
 Mr. Serjeant Yelverton nem. con. 
 
 It is not many years ago since another most amusing 
 piece of comedy used to be enacted on this otherwise 
 serious and solemn occasion. While the Speaker was 
 being conducted to the Chair by his sponsors, he had, in 
 accordance with a time-honoured custom, to wriggle his 
 shoulders as if he were struggling against his captors. 
 He meant to convey with sham modesty that he did not 
 desire this great office to be conferred upon him ; that it 
 was too high and exalted for one so mean and lowlv. 
 But, of course, all the time he was convinced that no 
 one was more fit and capable for the office than he, and 
 he would be mightily surprised and annoyed indeed if 
 his proposer and seconder were to accept his protesta- 
 tions and cease their efforts to induce him to take the 
 Chair. 
 
 That sham, however, is a thing of the past, and the 
 only survival of it which now remains is seen in the 
 action of the proposer and seconder in holding the 
 Speaker Designate by the hands and conducting him 
 to the Chair. He does not, however, immediately 
 go into the Chair. Standing on the dai's, he again 
 gratefully thanks the House for the high honour con- 
 ferred on him and then takes his seat as " Speaker 
 Elect, 1 " as at this stage he is called. The mace, which 
 all this time lay hidden under the table, is now pro- 
 duced by the Serjeant-at-Arms and placed in its usual 
 position on the table, to indicate that the House is 
 sitting. The leader of the House and the leader of the
 
 OPENING OF A NEW PARLIAMENT 109 
 
 Opposition offer him their congratulations, after which, 
 the Speaker Elect, having put the question of adjourn- 
 ment which is moved by the leader of the House 
 declares the " ayes " have it, and forthwith leaves the 
 Chamber. The first day's ceremony of the opening of 
 the new Parliament is over. 
 
 But although the Commons have chosen one of their 
 number " to take the chair of this House as Speaker," 
 the Constitution requires that before he can enter upon 
 the duties of his office he shall submit himself in the 
 House of Lords for the Sovereign's ratification of his 
 election. Until the royal approval has been signified, 
 he continues to be styled " Mr. Speaker Elect." Next 
 day sees the completion of the ceremony of the election 
 of Mr. Speaker. He enters the Chamber, by way of the 
 lobby, heralded by the customary cry of the door-keeper, 
 " Way for Mr. Speaker," and attended by the Serjeant- 
 at-Arms. But it is evident that his evolution as Mr. 
 Speaker is not yet complete. He is still, as it were, in 
 the chrysalis or transition state. He appeal's, therefore, 
 only half made-up, wearing court dress cutaway coat, 
 knee-breeches, silk stockings, and shoes but not his full 
 flowing gown, and with a small " bob-wig " instead of 
 the customary large and ample wig with wings which 
 fall over his shoulders. It needs, as I have said, the 
 royal approbation to transform him into a full-blown 
 Speaker. It is noticed, too, that the Serjeant-at-Arms 
 carries the mace, not upon his shoulder, but horizontally 
 across his arms. This is another indication that the 
 election of Speaker is not fully completed yet. Members 
 stand up in their places with uncovered heads as the 
 Speaker Elect walks slowly and solemnly up the floor, 
 making on the way three obeisances to the Chair.
 
 110 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 The Lords assemble on this second day of the new 
 Parliament at the same hour as the Commons, and 
 " Black Rod " is at once dispatched to invite the 
 attendance of members of the Lower House in the 
 House of Peel's, to hear the royal will in regard to the 
 election of the Speaker. On the first day, as we have 
 seen, " Black Rod " was allowed free admittance to the 
 House of Commons. He walked into the Chamber 
 with all deference, it is true, but without let or hind- 
 rance. But on this, the second day, the door of the 
 Chamber is locked by the Serjeant-at-Arms, and not 
 until " Black Rod " humbly knocks at the door is he 
 given admittance. Walking to the table with many 
 lowly bows to the Chair, he utters the usual invitation 
 to " this honourable House " to repair to the House of 
 Lords, and then retires backwards to the Bar. There 
 he is joined by the Speaker Elect and the Serjeant-at- 
 Arms, who still carries the mace rather awkward I v 
 across his arms, and, a procession being formed, tUe-y 
 proceed to the House of Lords, followed by the Com- 
 mons. On arriving at the Upper Chamber, the 
 Speaker Elect stands at the centre of the Bar, with 
 "Black Rod "to his right, the Serjeant-at-Arms (who 
 has left the mace outside), to his left, and his proposer 
 and seconder immediately behind him. He bows to 
 the Lords Commissioners, who in all the glory of 
 scarlet robes, are again seated on the form in front of 
 the Throne, and they acknowledge the salutation by 
 respectfully raising their cocked hats. Then the 
 Speaker Elect addresses them as follows : 
 
 I have to acquaint your Lordships that, in obedience to 
 her royal commands, her Majesty's faithful Commons have, 
 in the exercise of their undoubted right and privilege, pro-
 
 OPENING OF A NEW PARLIAMENT 111 
 
 ceeded to the choice of a Speaker. Their choice has fallen 
 upon myself, and I therefore present myself at your Lord- 
 ships' Bar, humbly submitting myself for her Majesty's 
 gracious approbation. 
 
 To this the Lord Chancellor, addressing the Speaker 
 Elect by name, replies : 
 
 We are commanded to assure you that her Majesty is so 
 fully sensible of your zeal for the public service, and your 
 undoubted efficiency to execute all the arduous duties of 
 the position which her faithful Commons have selected 
 you to discharge, that she does most readily approve and 
 confirm your election as Speaker. 
 
 It is interesting here to recall the fact that the royal 
 approval of the choice of the Commons for the Speaker- 
 ship has been only once refused. Needless to say, it 
 took place in the time of the Stuarts. At the opening 
 of a new Parliament in 1678, when Charles II. was 
 King, Sir Edward Seymour, a stout and sturdy oppo- 
 nent of unconstitutional pretensions on the part of the 
 Sovereign, and a man personally obnoxious to Charles, 
 was unanimously chosen Speaker by the House of 
 Commons. Next day he attended, in the usual course, 
 at the Bar of the House of Lords, accompanied by a 
 large crowd of members, for the royal approbation. 
 The King was present. "I have come for your 
 Majesty's gracious approval," said Seymour, the 
 Speaker Elect. " I cannot sanction your appointment, 
 sir,"" exclaimed Charles, from the Throne. " You must," 
 shouted the Commons, unmindful of the decorum of 
 the House of Lords. " I will not" said the King, 
 stamping his foot in angry emphasis. And he kept his 
 word. The quarrel between the King and the Com-
 
 112 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 mous was subsequently settled by a sort of compromise, 
 but Sir Edward Seymour was set aside. The Sove- 
 reign's veto over the Commons' 1 choice of a Speaker had 
 never before been exercised, and has never been exer- 
 cised since. 
 
 But to return to the new Speaker, standing at the 
 Bar of the House of Lords. After his election has been 
 ratified by the Sovereign, Mr. Speaker " submits him- 
 self in all humility to her Majesty's royal will and 
 pleasure ; " and if, in the discharge of his duties, and in 
 maintaining the rights and privileges of the Commons' 1 
 House of Parliament, he should fall inadvertently into 
 error, he " entreats that the blame may be imputed to 
 him alone, and not to her Majesty's faithful Commons. 1 " 
 Manly assertions of rights and privileges follow fast 
 on obsequious expressions of loyalty during the ten or 
 fifteen minutes the Speaker, surrounded by " the faith- 
 ful Commons,"" stands at the Bar of the House of Lords, 
 and holds this interesting historical colloquy which 
 has been repeated at every election of Speaker for many 
 centuries with the Lord Chancellor, not as the Presi- 
 dent of the House of Lords, but as the representative 
 of the Sovereign ; for the next duty of the Speaker is to 
 demand from the Sovereign, through the Royal Com- 
 missioners, recognition of all the ancient rights and 
 privileges of members of Parliament, which are " readily 
 granted " by the Sovereign, speaking through the Lord 
 Chancellor. This ends the ceremonial. The Speaker 
 and the other representatives of the House of Commons 
 return as they came, but this time with the mace borne 
 shoulder-high by the Serjeant-at-Arms. 
 
 On reaching the House of Commons, the Speaker 
 reports what has taken place in the Upper Chamber, as
 
 OPENING OF A NEW PARLIAMENT 113 
 
 if he had gone alone to the House of Lords, and 
 members were in absolute ignorance of what happened 
 
 there. 
 
 I have to report [he says] that in the House of Peers 
 her Majesty, by her Lords Commissioners, has been pleased 
 to signify her gracious approval of the choice which you 
 have made of me as your Speaker. I have also to report 
 that I then in your name and on your behalf laid claim, 
 by humble petition to her Majesty, to all your ancient 
 rights and undoubted privileges, namely, freedom of 
 speech in debate, freedom from arrest, and free access to 
 her Majesty at all times whenever occasion may require, 
 and that the most favourable construction may be put 
 upon all your proceedings ; all of which her Majesty, 
 through her Commissioners, was pleased to grant and con- 
 firm in as full and ample a manner as they have ever been 
 granted or confirmed by herself or by any of her Majesty's 
 royal predecessors. 
 
 Members hear, without the slightest tremor of emo- 
 tion, or the faintest indication of satisfaction, that their 
 "ancient rights and undoubted privileges" have been 
 fully confirmed. The solemn and portentous announce- 
 ment does not evoke even a solitary cheer. Finally 
 the Speaker concludes : 
 
 I have now again to make my grateful acknowledgments 
 to the House for the honour done to me in placing me 
 again in the chair, and to assure it of my complete devotion 
 to its service. 
 
 And thus ends the ceremony of the election of 
 Speaker of the House of Commons. 
 
 The Speaker then retires from the Chamber. A few
 
 II 4 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 minutes elapse, and he reappears again in the full div>N 
 of his office. He has discarded his "bob "for a full- 
 bottomed wig, and over his court, or full dress, he 
 wears the customary long and flowing black silk gown. 
 After this, members take the oath of allegiance.
 
 ] 1") 
 
 CHAPTER VI 
 MR. SPEAKER 
 
 TIIK President of the House of Commons is styled 
 " Mr. Speaker.' 1 '' The title appears at first sight some- 
 what paradoxical, since "Mr. Speaker" is the only 
 member of the House who does not take part in its 
 debates. But the original function of the holder of the 
 office was to sum up, like the judge at a trial, the case 
 of both sides at the end of a debate ; and to "speak" the 
 views of the House in the contentions with the Crown, 
 which, as we know, were many in regard to supplies 
 and taxes previous to the Revolution of 1688. 
 
 In the long contest between Parliament and the 
 Stuart kings, which lasted almost through the whole of 
 the seventeenth century, the efforts of the Commons to 
 establish constitutional government were often thwarted 
 by a Speaker who acted more as the abject servant of 
 the arbitrary Sovereign than as the president of a great 
 and free representative assembly. No wonder, then, 
 that entries are to be found in the Journals of the 
 House during the reigns of the Stuart kings, showing 
 the indignity with which servile Speakers were treated. 
 For instance, we read : 
 
 The House was informed by Mr. Speaker that Sir E. 
 Herbert put not off' his hat to him, but put out his tongue 
 and popped his mouth with his finger in scorn.
 
 116 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 And again: 
 
 The House was informed by Mr. Speaker that Mr. T. 
 
 T , in a loud and violent manner, and contrary to the 
 
 usage of Parliament, standing near the Speaker's chair, 
 cried " baw " in the Speaker's ear, to the great terror and 
 concernment of the Speaker and the members of the 
 House. 
 
 True it is, no doubt, that Mr. Speaker nowadays 
 has not the anxious or irksome work he had in those 
 far-off times when the Sovereign was wont on occasion 
 to come into direct conflict with his faithful Commons ; 
 but his duties to-day are more varied and extensive and 
 are sufficiently arduous in their nature. He is still the 
 spokesman of the Commons on all formal and cere- 
 monious occasions. He speaks, as hitherto, the opinions 
 of the House to the Sovereign when the occasion arises. 
 But he is rarely called upon to fulfil that function in 
 these days of calm and serene constitutional govern- 
 ment. He is now more occupied with duties im- 
 mediately associated with his office as president of the 
 House of Commons. Within its walls his authority is 
 supreme. He guides and controls the deliberations of 
 the House. He keeps the debate strictly to the subject 
 of discussion. He decides points of order. He interprets 
 the rules of the House. He must be ever ready to 
 assist the humblest of his colleagues in doubt or 
 difficulty in regard to a motion or Bill. He must 
 always show a keen regard for the honour and reputation 
 of the House. On the whole, it must be said the part 
 he has to play is not less delicate and difficult, although 
 it is of quite a different order, than that of his prede- 
 cessors in the turbulent days of the seventeenth century.
 
 MR. SPEAKER 117 
 
 " Go and assemble yourselves together, and elect one, a 
 discreet, wise, and learned man, to be your Speaker. 1 ' 
 Such were the words addressed by the Sovereign, long 
 ago, to a new House of Commons. They hold good 
 to-day. The Speaker needs to be " a discreet, wise, and 
 learned man." Above all things Mr. Speaker must be 
 scrupulously fair and absolutely impartial. The rules 
 he has to administer are of the most elastic character. 
 In some matters, and these like the closure not the 
 least important, his decisions are practically controlled 
 by no rules. In all cases he possesses the most un- 
 limited discretion. But he is often suddenly and 
 unexpectedly brought face to face with new situations ; 
 and consequently is often called upon to make new pre- 
 cedents. If, therefore, Mr. Speaker desires his rulings 
 to be accepted without demur, he must combine firm- 
 ness with strict impartiality, and above all with tact and 
 urbanity ; courageous self-assertion with unfailing good- 
 temper; that happy blending of gentleness in the 
 manner with rigorousness in the deed, which if it does 
 not make the object of his adverse decision exclaim : 
 
 He kicked me down stairs with such a good grace 
 That I thought he was handing me up, 
 
 will at least inspire members generally with a confidence 
 that he wields his unfettered authority with, as Edmund 
 Burke would say, " the cold neutrality of the impartial 
 judge;" that he is entirely uninfluenced by passion or 
 prejudice; that he decides according to the spirit, rather 
 than the letter ; and that whether ruling upon the 
 conduct of an individual, or upon the privileges of 
 a minority, his sense of justice and fairness, his
 
 118 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Parliamentary instinct and experience, have alone guided 
 him to the conclusion to which he has arrived. 
 
 Mr. Gully, returning thanks to the House for the 
 great honour it had conferred upon him in re-electing 
 him Speaker on the assembling of the new Parliament 
 in August, 1895, said, what perhaps is true, that while 
 to be impartial is the least arduous part of the Speaker's 
 functions, to appear impartial at all moments, and to 
 all sections of the House, is beyond the powers of man. 
 No doubt some passing feeling of soreness will occa- 
 sionally, in the heat of party conflict, be aroused 
 amongst those condemned or censured, or placed at a 
 disadvantage in party tactics by decisions of the Chair. 
 But if the Speaker has not impressed the Hou.se 
 generally with confidence in the soundness and im- 
 partiality of his judgments, with trust in his good 
 temper as well as in his strength of character, with the 
 conviction that he considers himself the conscience and 
 guardian of the House, and not the inflexible instrument 
 of the party leaders in occupation of the Treasury 
 bench, that feeling of soreness will not be, as it ought 
 to be, brief and transient, and the Speaker will find on 
 crucial occasions on occasions which, as recent years 
 have exemplified, not infrequently arise when the House 
 is disturbed that the assembly has slipped, for the time, 
 from his control. 
 
 Fortunately for its occupant, the Chair is the object 
 of the supreme respect and reverence of the House. It 
 receives almost idolatrous worship. When Mr. Speaker 
 himself walks solemnly up the floor, at the opening 
 of every sitting he makes three low obeisances to 
 the Chair. This reverential bowing to the inanimate, 
 carved oak seat of Mr. Speaker prominent object as
 
 MR. SPEAKER 119 
 
 it is on its dais inspires members susceptible to the 
 traditional feelings of the House with the deepest awe 
 of the Chair, and eventually leads to the canonisa- 
 tion of its occupant. Every Speaker, therefore, comes 
 in time to be regarded as a heaven-born Speaker. 
 This, of course, is entirely as it should be. There is 
 nothing which contributes to the authority of the Chair 
 so much as the conviction amongst members that in its 
 occupant they have made a supremely happy choice. 
 One result the great and supreme result is the 
 implicit obedience rendered to the rulings of the Chair. 
 Another is, that, however bitter may be the momentary 
 resentment of members who think themselves aggrieved 
 by these rulings of the Chair, the ultimate verdict in 
 regard to them is that they are invariably just, and 
 almost always that verdict is reached with commendable 
 promptitude. The Speaker never has to wait long for 
 his vindication at the hands even of those whom he feels 
 called upon to condemn. 
 
 Mr. Speaker, like all weak mortals, has his political 
 opinions, but, whatever they may be, he must never 
 exhibit them in any way in the House, or indeed out- 
 side it. The impartiality of the office is now most 
 jealously guarded. Viscount Peel, before his election as 
 Speaker in 188-3, was a follower of Mr. Gladstone. He 
 is supposed to have beeji a Unionist since the intro- 
 duction of the Home Rule Bill of 1886, but, as he said 
 himself in 1884, replying to the toast of the House of 
 Commons at a provincial banquet, he, as Speaker, knew 
 no politics or party ; he was no longer a partisan, and 
 his sole desire was to act impartially between the two 
 great parties which govern this country. The Speaker is 
 also usually returned unopposed at the General Election.
 
 120 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 In the election of 1895, however, Mr. William Court 
 Gully's seat at Carlisle was contested, and the oppo- 
 nent of the Speaker received from Mr. A. J. Balfour 
 a letter warmly endorsing his candidature. But in his 
 address to the electors Mr. Gully made no reference to 
 politics. He was still Mr. Speaker, and as such he 
 could have nothing to say to party questions. Happily 
 the contest ended in the re-election of Mr. Gully by 
 a substantial majority. It is unlikely that the seat of 
 a Speaker will be ever again contested. It is now 
 universally recognised that a Speaker cannot descend 
 into the rough strife of the electoral battle, however 
 detached he may keep himself during the contest from 
 active party controversy, without the independence and 
 dignity of the Chair being impaired. 
 
 The unanimous choice of Mr. Gully as Speaker by the 
 new Conservative House of Commons which assembled 
 after the General Election of 1895, gave both to the 
 precedent which has raised the Chair above the strife, 
 the passions and the prejudices of party ; and the prin- 
 ciple of the continuity in office of the occupant of the 
 Chair or, in other words, the permanent character of 
 the Speakership an accession of strength and stability 
 which will probably make them irresistible and decisive 
 for all time. Mr. Gully, who had sat in the House as a 
 Liberal for ten years was, on the retirement of Mr. Speaker 
 Peel in May 1895, shortly before the dissolution, nomi- 
 nated for the Chair by the Liberal party then in office, 
 and the Unionist party proposed Sir Matthew White 
 Ridley. On a division Mr. Gully was elected by the 
 narrow majority of eleven. Mr. Gully was publicly 
 warned when he was elected to the office that the Unionist 
 party disapproved his candidature and held themselves
 
 MR. SPEAKER 121 
 
 free to reject him in the new Parliament, if they were 
 returned to office. The Unionists came back triumphant 
 from the General Election. A feeling prevailed for a 
 time in the party, but not, indeed, to any wide extent, 
 that the Speaker should be chosen from its ranks. It 
 WHS pointed out that for sixty years there had not been 
 a Conservative Speaker Charles Manners Sutton having 
 been the last and that, apart from any consideration of 
 the legitimate ambition of Conservative members of the 
 House to occupy the Chair, in building up the body of 
 precedents which guide, if they do not control, future 
 Speakers of influence, Conservative wisdom ought to have 
 its proper share, if these precedents are to be a true reflex 
 of the general opinion. 
 
 But, fortunately, the influence of precedent and tradi- 
 tion over the conduct of the House of Commons proved 
 too strong for those who desired a Speaker chosen from 
 the Unionist party. Indeed, it now makes no difference 
 to any party, whether the Speaker comes from their 
 own ranks or from the ranks of their opponents. The 
 Speaker is, necessarily, at first the choice of a party; 
 but as he is conducted by his proposer and seconder 
 from his place on the benches to the Chair, he must 
 cut himself clear from all party ties and sympathies. 
 Henceforth he has no side in politics to aid and support 
 by his rulings in the Chair. His advice and informa- 
 tion as to the laws and regulations of the House are 
 at the disposal of every member of every party. Mr. 
 Gully, happily, was unanimously re-elected. This his- 
 torical incident in the history of the Speakership was 
 characterised by the utmost magnanimity, graciousness 
 and wisdom on the part of the Unionist party. Sir 
 John Mowbray, the oldest and one of the most influential
 
 122 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 and best reacted members of the Conservative party, 
 who proposed Sir Matthew White Ridley in opposition 
 to Mr. Gully as a candidate for the Speakership on the 
 occasion of the election to that office in May, undertook 
 the duty of inviting the House to re-elect Sir Matthew 
 Ridley's successful rival ; and when the motion had been 
 unanimously endorsed by the House, Mr. A. J. Balfour, 
 as Leader of the House, heartily congratulated Mr. 
 Gully, and paid a graceful and well-deserved compli- 
 ment to the dignity and impartiality the two chief 
 qualities of a Speaker which he -had displayed even 
 during his brief tenure of the Chair. Thus was marked 
 homage paid to the custom which is universally recog- 
 nised as constituting one of the main bulwarks of the 
 dignity and the independence of the House ; which 
 affords the most emphatic testimony the House could 
 give of its desire that its debates should be presided 
 over with absolute impartiality, and that the Speaker 
 should be removed from all possible temptations to 
 regard himself as in any measure the representative of 
 one side rather than of the other the custom, namely, 
 by which the Speaker is regarded not as the choice of a 
 party, or even of a majority, but of the whole House, 
 and by virtue of which the member who has been once 
 elevated to the Chair is re-elected without respect lo the 
 political opinions he may have entertained before he 
 donned the wig and gown of Mr. Speaker. 
 
 A Speaker is elected or re-elected at the opening of 
 every new Parliament. When the Chair of the House 
 of Commons becomes vacant by resignation or death, it 
 has always been considered the legitimate prize of the 
 party in office. In jx>int of fact, every Speaker, when 
 elected for the first time, has invariably been chosen
 
 MU. SPEAKER IIS 
 
 from the Ministerialists. This happened in the cases 
 of Sir Henry Addington, Sir John Mitford, Mr. Abbot, 
 Mr. Manners Sutton, Mr. Abercromby, Mr. Shaw- 
 Lefevre, Mr. Denison, Mr. Brand, Mr. Peel and Mr. 
 Gully, the Speakers of the present century ; but of all 
 these cases, in one only was an attempt made and made 
 successfully, to remove a Speaker from office at the 
 opening of a new Parliament, when there was a change 
 in the balance of Parliamentary power, as most notably 
 in 1841, 1874, 1886 and 1895. Indeed there are only 
 two cases on record in modern Parliamentary annals 
 at least in which a Speaker was displaced on the 
 assembling of a new Parliament, merely because he did 
 not belong to the party which came back from the 
 country with a majority. One occurred in the last 
 century, in 1780, when the Tories set aside Sir Fletcher 
 Norton, and the other in this century in 1835, when 
 the Whigs substituted Mr. Abercromby for Sir Charles 
 Manners Sutton. 
 
 The circumstances of the deposition of Sir Fletcher 
 Norton are not very creditable to George III. or to his 
 pliant Minister, Lord North. The King enjoyed an 
 annual Civil List amounting to X'800,000, in addition 
 to sources of income independent of Parliamentary con- 
 trol. But though he lived parsimoniously, he ran 
 heavily into debt by his lavish expenditure to increase 
 the influence and establish the ascendency of the Crown, 
 and Parliament had to supply, in addition to the allow- 
 ance of <*800,000 a year, the funds for this secret and 
 corrupt campaign against its independence. In 1777 
 the King applied for an increase of his annual allowance 
 to ,900,000, and for the means to discharge a debt of 
 -l'u'1 8,340. His demands were reluctantly acceded to
 
 124 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 by the House of Commons; and the Speaker (Sir Fletcher 
 Norton), on presenting the Bill voting the money at 
 the Bar of the House of Lords for the royal assent 
 which, needless to say, was readily granted thus out- 
 spokenly and without any courtly pretence, addressed 
 the King : " The Commons have not only granted to 
 your Majesty a large present supply ; but also a very 
 great additional revenue great beyond example ; great 
 beyond your Majesty's highest expense."" The language 
 was never forgiven by the King. At the next new Par- 
 liament he was punished for it by the loss of the Speaker's 
 Chair. 
 
 That there are only two such episodes on record is a 
 striking testimony to the permanent character of the 
 Speakership. On the other hand, two remarkable in- 
 stances of prolonged occupancy of the Chair are afforded 
 by the last century. Mr. Spencer Compton, who was 
 elected unanimously on the accession of George I., was 
 continued during the entire reign of that Sovereign in 
 the Chair of the House of Commons, which he only 
 vacated to become Prime Minister under George II. ; and 
 Mr. Onslow, who was appointed in 1727, and continued 
 in undisputed possession of the Chair for thirty-three 
 years, amid all the changes of Government. There have 
 been only four contests for the Speakership since the 
 beginning of the present century. On January 29, 1833, 
 the opening day of the first Parliament after the passing 
 of the great Keform Act of 1832, Charles Manners 
 Sutton, who had been Speaker for nearly sixteen years, 
 was proposed for re-election by the Whigs, although he 
 was known to be a pronounced Tory, his proposer being 
 Lord Morpeth, and his seconder Sir Francis Burdett. 
 On behalf of the Radicals, Joseph Hume proposed, and
 
 MR. SPEAKER 125 
 
 Daniel O'Connell seconded, Edward John Littleton for 
 the office. This gentleman did not desire to have his 
 name submitted to the House, but a division was taken, 
 with the result that Mr. Littleton's name was rejected by 
 241 votes to 31, and Charles Manners Sutton was then 
 unanimously re-elected. 
 
 When the next new Parliament met, on February 19, 
 1835, the Tories were in office the Whigs having been 
 dismissed by William IV. in the preceding November ; 
 but as the result of the General Election which 
 followed a majority of Whigs confronted Sir Robert 
 Peel in the House of Commons, determined to fight 
 him on every issue. Charles Manners Sutton was again 
 nominated for re-election, his proposer and seconder 
 this time being Tories. Mr. Speaker Sutton (Lord 
 Canterbury as he afterwards became) was, as already 
 said, a pronounced Tory. It was charged against 
 him that he had been actively concerned on behalf of 
 his party in the intrigues of the great crisis of 1832, and 
 that he had even tried unsuccessfully to form a Govern- 
 ment of his own, though supposed as Speaker to be 
 exalted above all party questions. The Whigs, there- 
 fore, put forward James Abercromby, who was elected 
 by 316 votes to 306, or by the narrow majority of ten. 
 Mr. Abercromby was re-elected without opposition at 
 the commencement of the new Whig Parliament of 1837; 
 and when he retired in May 1839 the Whigs, who were 
 still in office, nominated Charles Shaw-Lefevre, while 
 the Tories ran Henry Goulbourn, the former being 
 elected by a majority of eighteen the voting being 317 
 to 299. 
 
 " I do not think it necessary that the person elected 
 to the Chair, who had ably and conscientiously performed
 
 126 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 his duty, should be displaced because his political 
 opinions are not consonant with those of the majority 
 of the House." These wise words, which happily have 
 since been invariably followed, were uttered by Sir 
 Robert Peel, as leader of the House of Commons, in 
 support of the re-appointment of Mr. Shaw-Lefevre to 
 the Chair, in August 1841, after a General Election, in 
 which the Melbourne Administration which originally 
 elected Mr. Shaw-Lefevre were defeated and the Tories 
 returned in a majority. John Evelyn Denison was 
 unanimously chosen to succeed Mr. Shaw-Lefevre in 
 1857 ; Henry Bouverie Brand, to succeed Mr. Denison 
 in 1872 ; and Arthur Wellesley Peel to succeed Mr. 
 Brand in 1884, the Liberals, by a curious coincidence, 
 being in office on each occasion the Chair became vacant. 
 The Commons have always been jealous of all inter- 
 ference by the Crown with them in their choice of a 
 Speaker. This was strikingly illustrated in 1695, on the 
 resignation of the Speakership by Sir John Trevor, who 
 (as we shall see presently) was almost immediately after- 
 wards expelled for corruption. Mr. Wharton, the 
 Comptroller of the Household, proposed Sir Thomas 
 Littleton for the Speakership. In the course of his 
 remarks he said : " I shall without fear of displeasing 
 any person out of so many nominate " " Upon this," 
 says the Parliamentary History, "he was interrupted by 
 a great noise in the House crying, ' No, no, no, 1 and 
 several gentlemen stood up to speak to order. Excep- 
 tions were taken by several members ' that it was con- 
 trary to the undoubted right of the House of choosing 
 their own Speaker to have any person who brought a 
 message from the King to nominate one to them." 1 " 
 Ultimately the Crown nominee was rejected, and a Mr.
 
 MH. SPEAKER 127 
 
 Paul Foley chox-n. Indeed, even the Government of the 
 day have nothing whatever to do, at least ostensibly, 
 with the election of the Speaker, which is understood 
 to be the independent action of the House. It has been 
 an unwritten law that no Minister of the Crown shall 
 propose a candidate since John Hatsell, clerk-assistant 
 from 1788 to 1797, and author of " Precedents of the 
 House of Commons, 11 warned William Pitt in 1789, 
 when Pitt was Prime Minister, that it would not be 
 fitting for him to nominate Henry Addington for the 
 Chair. "I think that the choice of a Speaker should 
 not be on the motion of the Minister, 11 said Hatsell 
 to Addington. " Indeed, an invidious use might be 
 made of it to represent you as the friend of the Minister 
 rather than the choice of the House. 11 
 
 Mr. Speaker was created "First Commoner of the 
 llealm 11 by an Act of the reign of William and 
 Mary, and, as such, he has precedence of all com- 
 moners. It is a singular circumstance that the very 
 first of the First Commoners of the Realm, Sir John 
 Trevor, is also notorious in Parliamentary history as 
 l>eing the only Speaker who has ever been expelled 
 from the House of Commons. Trevor was originally 
 an office boy in a lawyer's office, and by dint of sheer 
 ability, and, it is said, also by methods unscrupulous 
 and disreputable, reached to a high position at the Bar, 
 and to the Chair of the House of Commons. He was 
 Speaker when the Act of William and Mary, conferring 
 the high dignity of First Commoner on him and his 
 successors, was passed. A few years later it was dis- 
 covered that he had received a bribe for helping to 
 pass a Bill through Parliament ; and on March 12, 
 1695, the wretched man had to pronounce from the
 
 128 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Chair the sentence of his own guilt and dishonour, by 
 declaring that the House had unanimously resolved, 
 " That Sir John Trevor, Speaker of this House, for 
 receiving a gratuity of 1000 guineas from the City of 
 London after the passing of the Orphans 1 Bill, is guilty 
 of the high crime of misdemeanour.' 1 '' Next day Trevor 
 was expelled by resolution of the House. This time, 
 however, he thought it better not to take the Chair. 
 
 Trevor suffered from a squint, and thereby hangs an 
 amusing tale. One of the duties of the Speaker is to 
 designate the member who is to continue the debate. 
 " Catching the Speaker's eye," it is called. Formerly 
 the Speaker looked at the member, and bowed his head 
 to signify he was to speak. But it frequently happened 
 during the Speakership of Trevor, that owing to his 
 obliquity of vision, two members in different parts of 
 the House were each convinced he had "caught the 
 Speaker's eye," and it therefore became necessary, for 
 the sake of peace and harmony, for Trevor to call tin 1 
 member by name. This practice has since prevailed. 
 
 The Speaker is a member of the House, and his elec- 
 tion to the Chair does not theoretically carry with it 
 the forfeiture of his rights to take part in debates and 
 divisions. But these rights are now never exercised, 
 and probably never will be exercised again. It is not 
 long, however, since the Speaker spoke and voted in 
 Committee, when, of course, he was not in the Chair. 
 During the Committee stage of a Bill introduced by 
 Henry Grattan, in 1813, to enable Roman Catholics to 
 be elected members of Parliament, an amendment to 
 omit the words, "to sit and vote in either House of 
 Parliament," was moved by Mr. Speaker Abbot, and 
 being carried, was fatal to the measure. The only vote
 
 MR SI'KAKKH li><) 
 
 the Speaker now gives is a casting' vote when the 
 numbers in a division on each side are equal. For- 
 ttmatelv for Mr. Speaker, a tie is a very rare occur- 
 rence. There are only about fifteen occasions recorded 
 in Parliamentarv history on which the Speaker Mas 
 called upon to give a casting vote. But a tie once 
 placed Mr. Speaker Abbot in a most unpleasant and 
 painful position. It was in the year 1806. A charge 
 of misconduct had been brought against Lord Melville, 
 who was Treasurer to the Navy in the Ministry of Pitt. 
 After an angry debate in the House of Commons, 
 during which the Prime Minister made a powerful 
 speech in defence of his accused colleague, a division on 
 the question was taken, and resulted in a tie ; 216 for 
 the motion adjudging Lord Melville guilt v of the 
 charge, and 216 against ! No wonder the Speaker was 
 overcome bv deep emotion. For ten minutes he sat in 
 the Chair, pale and trembling, in the crowded and 
 deeply excited and silent House, before he could gather 
 sufficient physical strength to rise and deliver his deci- 
 sion. It was against Lord Melville ! Pitt crushed his 
 hat over his eyes to hide the tears of mortification for 
 his own defeat, and sorrow for the sad fate of his friend 
 and colleague, and rushed out of the House. 
 
 There was once an occupant of the Chair who was so 
 unnerved by having to give his casting vote that he 
 cried, " I am an ' Ay,' " then " No, no, I am a ' No, 1 I 
 should say." In the memorable division on the third 
 reading of the Church Rate Abolition Bill, in 1861, 
 there arose this complication : Ayes, 274 ; Noes, 274. 
 " A tie, a tie," called the rival sides, and it was the 
 duty of the Speaker, Mr. Denison, to give the cast- 
 ing vote, which he did against the Bill an incident 
 
 I
 
 130 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 remembered by Mr. Gladstone, as one enacted in breath- 
 less silence ; and accordingly the Bill was thrown out. 
 A tie also occurred on the third reading of the Tests 
 Abolition (Oxford) Bill, in 1864, Mr. Denison being 
 again the occupant of the Chair ; but this time he gave 
 the casting vote in favour of the measure, which was in 
 consequence passed. 
 
 Formerly no provision was made for supplying the 
 place of the Speaker by a Deputy Speaker, and if he were 
 unavoidably absent, no business could be done. The 
 Clerk simply acquainted the House with the cause of the 
 Speaker's absence, and put the question for adjournment. 
 When the Speaker by illness was unable to attend for 
 a considerable time, it was necessary to elect another 
 Speaker, with the usual formalities of the permission of 
 the Crown and the royal approval. On the recovery of 
 the Speaker, the latter would resign, or " fall sick,"" and 
 the former was re-elected with a repetition of the same 
 ceremonies. Since 1853, however, in the absence of the 
 Speaker, the Chair is taken by the Chairman of Com- 
 mittees, as Deputy Speaker, who wears neither gown, 
 nor wig, nor court dress, but man's ordinary conven- 
 tional attire. 
 
 " The First Commoner of the Realm " is handsomely 
 recompensed for his services to the State. In former 
 times his income was 5 a day, in addition to liberal 
 fees on private Bills. He now receives an annual 
 salary of 5000, fixed by Act of Parliament; an 
 allowance of 100 for stationery ; and has besides a 
 residence and suite of offices in the Palace of West- 
 minster ; a secretary, a staff of clerks, and the con- 
 trol of some patronage in the way of clerkships to 
 the House of Commons. He is also entitled to ^1000
 
 MR. SPEAKER 131 
 
 equipment money upon his election. He enjoys in 
 addition some quaint and ancient perquisites. The 
 State supplies him on his election with two hogsheads 
 of claret. The Master of the Buckhounds sends him, 
 as a gift, every year a buck and a doe, killed in the 
 royal preserves at Windsor; and from the Cloth- 
 workers' 1 Company of London he receives, as a Christ- 
 mas present, a generous width of the best broadcloth. 
 He has also a State coach, which is said to have been 
 made in the time of Cromwell. At one period in 
 Parliamentary historv this carriage was regularly used 
 on the occasion of high public ceremonials in which the 
 First Commoner took part, but in recent times it has 
 rarely been employed for the purpose. It was last seen 
 in the streets of London in 1872, when the Speaker 
 attended the thanksgiving service at St. Paul's after the 
 recovery of the Prince of Wales from his dangerous ill- 
 ness. The coach was repainted in 1887 for the service 
 held in celebration of her Majesty's jubilee, but at the 
 last moment as the vehicle weighs over five tons, and 
 showed signs of decay Mr. Speaker Peel decided to go 
 to the Abbey on foot. 
 
 A considerable portion of the Speaker's salary is spent 
 in official entertainments during the Parliamentary Ses- 
 sion such as dinners and levees at which the guests 
 are expected to appear either in uniform or court dress, 
 ordinary evening-dress being strictly forbidden ; and in 
 "at homes," on the beautiful Terrace, when evening- 
 dress is allowed. The Speaker is attired at these func- 
 tions in a black velvet court suit, knee breeches, with 
 silk stockings, a steel handled sword, and with lace 
 ruffles round his neck and wrists. At dinners and 
 levees the table and huge sideboards are spread with
 
 132 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 magnificent old plate belonging ex officin to the Speaker ; 
 and from the walls look down portraits of many famous 
 " First Commoners," of whom there have been l!J7, in 
 a long and distinguished line from the first, Sir William 
 Hungerford, in the year 1377. 
 
 Moreover, it is the privilege of a retiring Speaker 
 to be "called to the House of Lords," as the phrase 
 goes, and the peerage is accompanied by a pension of 
 ^4000 a year for life.
 
 CHAPITER VII 
 TAKING THE OATH OF ALLEGIANCE 
 
 LKT us linger awhile in the Upper Chamber to note 
 what happens when, on the second day of the opening 
 of a new Parliament, the Commons return to their own 
 House, with the Speaker at their head. As the noise 
 of the retreating feet breaks the solemn stillness of " the 
 gilded Chamber," the five Lord Commissioners rise from 
 their bench, and with slow, toilsome footsteps, as if 
 the weight of their ample scarlet robes trailing on the 
 ground behind them impedes their progress, disappear 
 behind the Throne. 
 
 After a brief interval the Lord Chancellor reappears, 
 attired in his customary robes which, like the Speaker's, 
 consist of a full-bottomed wig, and a long flowing 
 black gown worn over levee dress and takes his seat 
 on the Woolsack. The junior bishop among the Lords 
 Spiritual present reads the prayers, while the peers 
 stand with bowed and reverent heads. Then the pro- 
 cess of swearing-in begins. The Lord Chancellor is 
 the first to come to the table ; and with a copy of 
 the New Testament in his right hand, and a large 
 pasteboard card, containing the words of the oath, in 
 his left, he repeats, after the Clerk, the declaration that 
 he will be faithful and bear true allegiance to her 
 Majesty ; then kisses the book, and writes his name on
 
 13* THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 the Roll of Parliament. It is the first signature on the 
 virgin sheet. The roll is of a different character in 
 each House. In the Upper Chamber it is really a roll. 
 It consists of one long sheet of paper about sixteen 
 inches in width, which winds round a roller. The 
 peel's simply write their ordinary signatures, such as 
 " Salisbury, 11 or " Rosebery." 
 
 When the Lord Chancellor has taken his seat on the 
 Woolsack, Garter King of Arms (the head of the 
 Herald's College), appears in his gorgeous tabard, or 
 herald's coat, emblazoned back and front with many 
 quaint devices, and delivers to the Clerk the Roll of the 
 Lords Temporal. The Clerk of the Crown, in conven- 
 tional attire, also enters and presents a certificate of the 
 return of the sixteen representative Scottish peers, who 
 are elected for every new Parliament by such of the 
 lords of Scotland as are not peers of the United 
 Kingdom. After this the peers come to the table 
 without any order or precedence being observed, and 
 each, having first handed over his writ of summons, a 
 small piece of limp parchment, to the Clerk, takes the 
 oath, and subscribes the Roll. 
 
 " Once a peer a peer for life," it is said, truly enough, 
 and yet every Lord of Parliament must receive, at the 
 dissolution, a fresh summons from the Crown, and must 
 take a fresh oath of allegiance before he can resume his 
 legislative duties in the new Parliament. The writs are 
 issued from the Crown Office at Westminster to " the 
 Lords Spiritual and Temporal, 11 individually. The 
 mediaeval quaintness of the writ of summons it has 
 been in use for over six centuries is interesting. It is 
 as follows :
 
 TAKING THE OATH OF ALLEGIANCE 135 
 
 Victoria, by the grace of God, of the United Kingdom of 
 Great Britain and Ireland Queen, Defender of the Faith, to 
 our , greeting. Whereas by the advice and con- 
 
 sent of Our Council for certain arduous and urgent affairs 
 concerning Us, the State, and defence of Our said United 
 Kingdom and the Church, We have ordered a certain 
 Parliament to be holden at Our city of Westminster on 
 the day of next ensuing, and there to 
 
 treat and have conference with the Prelates, Great Men, 
 and Peers of our Realm. W r e strictly enjoining command 
 you upon the faith and allegiance by which you are bound to Us 
 that the weightiness of the said affairs and imminent perils 
 considered (waiving all excuses) you be at the said day and 
 place personally present with Us, and with the said Pre- 
 lates, Great Men, and Peers, to treat and give your council 
 upon the affairs aforesaid. And this as you regard Us and 
 Our honour and the safety and defence of the said United 
 Kingdom and Church and dispatch of the said affairs in 
 no wise do you omit. Witness Ourself at Westminster, 
 the day of in the year of our Reign. 
 
 To . A writ of summons to Parliament 
 
 the day of next. 
 
 The writ sent to the twenty-six spiritual peers is the 
 same, save that they are commanded to attend upon 
 their " faith and love " instead of upon their " faith and 
 allegiance,"" as in the case of the peers temporal. The 
 Archbishops of Canterbury and York, and the Bishops 
 of London, Durham and Winchester, become Lords of 
 Parliament immediately on their consecration ; but the 
 other prelates of the Church Establishment must await, 
 in the order of seniority of consecration, writs of 
 summons to the House of Lords, according as vacancies 
 arise in the estate of the Lords Spiritual. The number 
 of spiritual peers is limited to twenty-six, and as there
 
 136 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 are thirty-four prelates, eight bishops of the Establish- 
 ment are therefore not Lords of Parliament, but all of 
 them save the Bishop of Sodor and Man are entitled 
 to seats, in the order of their consecration, as vacancies 
 arise. 
 
 The twenty-eight representative peers allotted to 
 Ireland by the Act of Union are elected for life by the 
 Irish lords, who are not peers of the United Kingdom. 
 On the death of a representative peer of Ireland, the 
 Clerk of the Crown and Hanaper in Dublin sends a 
 voting paper for the election of a new representative 
 peer to every Irish lord who applies for it. After the 
 lapse of fifty-two days, the voting papers returned are 
 counted ; and to the peer who has received the highest 
 number of votes a writ of summons to the House of 
 Lords is forthwith issued from the Crown Office at 
 Westminster. 
 
 But no writs of summons are issued to the sixteen 
 Scottish representative peers, who, unlike the Irish repre- 
 sentative peers, are elected for every Parliament. After 
 the dissolution, a royal Proclamation is posted at the 
 Market Cross, Edinburgh, and in all the county towns 
 of Scotland, ordering the election within ten days of the 
 sixteen representative peers. A meeting of the peers 
 of Scotland is held at Holyrood Palace on the day 
 appointed, and with the Lord Clerk Register in the 
 chair, the election is proceeded with. A list of the 
 peers elected is sent to the Clerk of the Crown at 
 Westminster, and is, as already described, presented by 
 him in the House of Lords on the day the swearing-in 
 of the peers commences. No writ of summons is there- 
 fore produced by a Scottish representative peer when he 
 com^s to the table to be sworn. The Clerk simply sees
 
 TAKING HIE OATH OF ALLEGIANCE 137 
 
 that his name is included in the list furnished by the 
 Clerk of the Crown. A peer who takes his seat and 
 votes without having first subscribed the oath is liable 
 to a penalty of ,500. A few lords have so voted at 
 times, through inadvertence, or ignorance of the law. 
 Each thought that, having subscribed the oath and 
 taken his seat in the House, on his succession to the 
 peerage, he was not required to go through the same 
 proceeding again when a new Parliament was summoned. 
 But bills of indemnity had to be passed through both 
 Houses of Parliament, and to be transformed into Ad> 
 by the royal assent, in the usual course, in order to 
 protect those peers from an action at law, which any 
 citizen might institute, for the recovery of the penalties 
 incurred. It would seem, however, that an Act of 
 Indemnity is, in such a case, no longer deemed neces- 
 sary. Curious to note, the Lord Chief Justice (Lord 
 Russell of Killowen) spoke and voted in the second 
 Session of the present Parliament (1896) without having 
 first taken the oath. But no Act of Indemnity was 
 passed, and no one thought of trying in the Court of 
 Exchequer to get ^500 from the Lord Chief Justice, 
 for his unintentional violation of the law of Parlia- 
 ment. 
 
 So much for the scene in the House of Lords when 
 peers subscribe to the oath, and take their seats, on 
 the assembling of a new Parliament. But occasionally 
 in the House of Lords a strange procession, un- 
 announced in any way save that the fact that the 
 Lord Chancellor as he sits on the Woolsack is wearing 
 his three-cornered hat portends that something is 
 about to happen walks up the floor from the Bar to 
 the Woolsack, just before public business commences.
 
 138 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 First comes " Black Rod "" wearing his customary court 
 dress, and with his ebony rod tipped with gold in his 
 right hand ; then " Garter King of Arms," in his 
 magnificent tabard, followed by the " Hereditary Earl 
 Marshal of England " (the Duke of Norfolk, on whose 
 family the office was conferred by Charles II. in 1672) 
 in his duke^s robes of scarlet, slashed with many bars of 
 ermine. These officers of State are followed by three 
 peers in their scarlet robes. This picturesque procession 
 is the prelude to the introduction of a newly-created 
 peer. One of the three is about to take his seat ; the 
 other two are his sponsors. On reaching the Woolsack 
 the new peer drops on his knee and presents a huge 
 rolled document to the Lord Chancellor. It is the 
 patent of the creation of his peerage. The document 
 is then passed on to one of the clerks at the table he 
 is known as the Reading Clerk who, unfolding it, dis- 
 playing its coloured heraldic devices, and the impression 
 of the Great Seal, reads its terms to the House. Then 
 the writ of summons is produced, and the oath is 
 administered to the neophyte, at the table. Having 
 subscribed the roll, the new peer is conducted by his 
 sponsors with much circumambulation to one of the 
 benches allotted to his rank in the peerage, and there 
 the three, taking their seats the new peer in the 
 centre rise three times, and, lifting their cocked hats, 
 bow to the Lord Chancellor, who acknowledges each 
 salute by lifting his own hat which he has donned for 
 the occasion and an inclination of his head. The 
 procession is again reformed. The new peer as he 
 passes the Woolsack receives a handshake from the Lord 
 Chancellor, and then disappears with his companions 
 through one of the doors at the back of the Throne.
 
 TAKING THE OATH OF ALLEGIANCE 139 
 
 
 This ceremony takes place only on the introduction of 
 
 a newly created peer, or of a peer elevated to a higher 
 rank. Peers succeeding to a title, and Irish and Scottish 
 representative peers, on taking their seats simply present 
 their writs of summons at the table, take the oath and 
 subscribe the roll, as at the opening of a new Parlia- 
 ment. In the case of a spiritual peer, he is introduced 
 by two other Bishops, presents his writ of summons to 
 the Clerk, takes the oath, subscribes the roll, and is 
 conducted by his sponsors to his seat on the Episcopal 
 benches, bowing three times to the Lord Chancellor 
 during the walk round the table. 
 
 In the House of Commons the procedure of swearing- 
 in members at the opening of a new Parliament is 
 somewhat different. The Speaker is the first to take 
 the oath. As soon as he returns to the Chair, in the 
 full garb of Mr. Speaker (as already described), he 
 stands on the dais, and repeats the words of the oath 
 after the Clerk. It is a very simple declaration, and is 
 the same in both Houses. 
 
 I, , do swear that I will be faithful and bear true 
 
 allegiance to her Majesty Queen Victoria, her heirs, and 
 successors, according to law. So help me God. 
 
 The Speaker then signs the Test Roll, which, differ- 
 ing in form from the Roll of Parliament in the L'pper 
 House, is a large book strongly bound in leather, wi.th 
 brass clasps, opening at the bottom instead of at the 
 sides, and with a sheet of blotting-paper between every 
 two leaves. A new Test Roll is provided for each new 
 Parliament. 
 
 After the Speaker, members are sworn -in in batches 
 of five. To expedite matters, a temporary table is
 
 140 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 
 brought into the Chamber, and, being placed in line 
 
 with the Clerk ""s table, is provided with five large paste- 
 board cards, on which the oath is printed in bold type, 
 and with three copies of the New Testament. At this 
 table one of the clerks-assistant stands, and administers 
 the oath to the members, as they present themselves 
 in batches of five, two or three holding between them 
 a Testament, and each having one of the oath-cards 
 in his left hand. Members of "her Majesty's most 
 honourable Privy Council " or Ministers, past and 
 present have precedence, and take the oath separately 
 from the other members. 
 
 In the Lords, as we have seen, each peer, before 
 taking the oath, and subscribing the roll, gives the 
 Clerk his writ of summons. But in the Commons no 
 proof of identity no evidence that they are duly 
 elected M.P.s is required from the gentlemen that 
 present themselves at the table to take the oath and 
 subscribe the Test Roll. It is true that the Clerk of 
 the Crown receives at his office at Westminster, from 
 the returning officer of every constituency, the return 
 of the writ with the name of the elected member, and 
 that the names of the members, with the constituency 
 each represents, are inscribed in a book, called the 
 " Return Book," which is delivered by the Clerk of the 
 Crown to the Clerk of the House of Commons on the 
 day the new Parliament opens. The returns them- 
 selves are retained in the Crown Office till the dissolu- 
 tion of Parliament, when they are transferred to the 
 Record Office. 
 
 But though ordinarily all the approaches to the 
 Chamber are guarded by vigilant doorkeepers, who 
 know every member of the House, at the opening of a
 
 TAKING THE OATH OF ALLEGIANCE 141 
 
 Parliament when there is usually a large influx of 
 new members, who, of course, are strangers to the 
 policemen and attendants on duty at the Palace of 
 Westminster it would not be difficult for an impostor 
 of nerve and audacity, with some knowledge of the 
 House and its ways, to enter the House, by per- 
 sonating some member, to take part in a division 
 on the Speakership, should there be a contest for the 
 Chair, and even to take the oath, and subscribe the 
 roll. There is no case of such personation on record; 
 but it is possible in the circumstances. The Return 
 Book is a conspicuous object on the table during the 
 process of swearing-in the members. It is there for 
 reference by the Clerk, in the event of doubt arising as 
 to the identity of any person who may present himself at 
 the table. However, as it contains merely the name of 
 each member and his constituency, and not his portrait 
 and description, it is not an insuperable bar to persona- 
 tion. 
 
 As members take the oath, they proceed, in single 
 file, to subscribe the Test Roll, over which the Chief 
 Clerk stands sentinel. Each member writes his full 
 name, and that of his constituency the Leader of the 
 House and the Leader of the Opposition subscribing 
 after the Speaker and he is then introduced by the Clerk 
 to the Speaker, by whom he is greeted with a hearty 
 handshake. So the process of swearing-in goes on for 
 two or three days. It is slow and tedious work, and 
 the House is not a lively place while it is in progress. 
 Occasionally a special incident relieves the tedium of the 
 process. Some members make an affirmation instead of 
 taking the oath. It is no unusual thing either to see a 
 member, wearing his hat, sworn on a book provided
 
 142 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 by himself. These members belong to the Jewish per- 
 suasion, which requires the oath to be taken with 
 covered head, on a copy of the Pentateuch, or first five 
 books of the Old Testament. The oath is administered 
 in about a minute to each batch. It is in signing 
 the Test Roll that time is consumed. The member 
 who has not his glasses adjusted, or who searches on 
 the table for the right pen with which to inscribe 
 his name on this roll of fame in bold and lasting 
 caligraphy, may block a group anxious to get to the 
 lunch-rooms, or the smoking-rooms ; and may prove the 
 same kind of nuisance to his fellows as the man who 
 wants to change a five-pound note at the booking-office, 
 though there is a long and impatient queue behind, and 
 the train is just going out. 
 
 In the case of a member returned at a bye-election 
 the process of introduction is entirely different. He 
 has to be escorted to the table to take the oath by two 
 other members of Parliament. This is one of the 
 immemorial usages of the House of Commons. It 
 originated in a far remote age, when it was really 
 necessary, in order to prevent personation, that two 
 members of the House should identify the claimant of 
 a seat after a bye-election as the person named in the 
 writ of the returning officer. The precaution has been 
 needless for many a year. But such is the reluctance of 
 the House of Commons to part with any one of its 
 quaint, antique ceremonies, no matter how remote from 
 the actual state of things it may have become in the 
 whirligig of time, that this formality is still retained ; 
 and though a representative may come to the Bar of 
 the House as the unanimous choice of a constituency of 
 ten thousand electors and produce his credentials, he will
 
 TAKING THE OATH OF ALLEGIANCE 143 
 
 not be permitted to take his seat unless two members 
 act as his sponsors. 
 
 Dr. Kenealy, the famous counsel for " The Claimant/'' 
 presented himself at the table unattended, after his 
 election for Stoke-upon-Trent in February 1874. Such 
 was the feeling against him amongst members owing to 
 his conduct in connection with the Tichborne case, 
 that he could not get two to act as his sponsors. 
 But he boldly walked from the Bar alone, carrying 
 a big unbrella, which he, with audacious irreverence, 
 hung by its crook on the sacrosanct mace when he 
 reached the table. The Speaker informed him that if 
 he could not comply with the ancient usage of the 
 House he would not be permitted to take the oath, and 
 subscribe the Test Roll. Dr. Kenealy produced the 
 returning officer's certificate of his election as member 
 for Stoke-upon-Trent. But that document was not 
 sufficient. It was also necessary that he should be 
 escorted by two members to the table, to which he had 
 come alone, but without any difficulty or danger to 
 himself or to any one else, and without any dislocation 
 of the machinery of Parliament. He was, therefore, 
 obliged to withdraw from the House. 
 
 The position was somewhat absurd. No one could 
 question Dr. Kenealy's return. He laboured under 
 no legal disability, and yet he was not allowed to take 
 his seat because he could not comply with a mere cere- 
 monial custom. It was indeed impossible that a duly 
 elected representative could be excluded from the House 
 for such a reason, and so a special resolution, moved by 
 Mr. Disraeli, who was then leader of the House, was 
 passed, to dispense with the usual introductory ceremony 
 in the case of Dr. Kenealy. The member for Stoke-
 
 144 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 upon-Trent once more came alone from the Bar to the 
 table. The oath was administered to him ; he signed 
 the roll, and then disappeared in the mass of members 
 among whom he could not count two friends. 
 
 Another incident, arising out of the absence of spon- 
 sors, occurred in 1893. As I have said, two or three 
 days are set apart at the opening of a new Parliament, 
 for the swearing-in of members. But at least for a 
 fortnight afterwards stragglers turn up at Westminster. 
 No ceremony of initiation is required for them. They 
 simply present themselves at the table, before public 
 business commences, and subscribe the oath. That 
 rule, however, does not always hold good. Mr. Thomas 
 Curran (who was returned for an Irish constituency 
 at the General Election of 1892, while in South Aus- 
 tralia, and was unable to take his seat in the House 
 till the Session of 1893) walked from the Bar to the 
 table without any sponsors, but he was not allowed 
 to subscribe to the oath until he went back to the 
 Bar again and returned between two colleagues. Mr. 
 Curran conversed for a few moments with the Speaker, 
 after the usual introduction by the Clerk. He de- 
 sired to explain his action to the House at once. 
 The Speaker readily consented. Rising, he said, " Mr. 
 Curran desires to make an explanation to the House,' 1 '' 
 and thereupon that gentleman, standing on one of the 
 steps of the Speaker's Chair, stated to the interested 
 House, that, having been returned at the General Elec- 
 tion, and not at a bye-election, he had ^thought it 
 was unneccessary that he should be introduced by two 
 members. This incident is remarkable for^two unique 
 features. It is the only case on record of a mem- 
 ber having addressed the House the moment he had
 
 TAKING THE OATH OF ALLEGIANCE 145 
 
 subscribed the Test Roll, and also the only occasion a 
 private member has spoken from the steps of the 
 Speaker's Chair. 
 
 The introduction of a new member after a bye-election 
 is always an event of interest in the House of Commons. 
 The members of the party to which he belongs assemble 
 to give him a hearty welcome, especially if he be an 
 important accession to their ranks, or if he has won the 
 seat from the other side. The time when a new member 
 may be introduced is after "questions,'" which are asked 
 early in the sitting, and Ixjfore the consideration of the 
 first Bill of the "Orders of the day" or agenda paper, 
 is taken up. He sits awaiting the time for his intro- 
 duction on one of the benches below the Bar. There 
 are two of these benches at each side of the Chamber, 
 " under the clock " the clock, by the way, being over 
 the main entrance to the Chamber, facing the Chair 
 and though they are, of course, within the four walls of 
 the Chamber, they are not, to speak by the card, within 
 " the precincts of debate,' 1 for a member cannot address 
 the House from them. Care must be taken that the 
 new member does not take a seat inside the Bar. 
 bhould he do so, even inadvertently) he is liable to a 
 penalty of 500, and what is more, he vacates his seat, 
 " as if he were dead," to use the graphic phrase of the 
 regulation. A Bill of Indemnity would, of course, l>e 
 passed to relieve him of the fine, if his action were due 
 to oversight or ignorance. But the disqualification 
 would still remain. Of that no Bill of Indemnity could 
 relieve him. He would have to be elected again. 
 
 New menilHTs are presumably coached as to what 
 they are required to do during the ceremony of initia- 
 tion. And yet aome of them make ludicrous blunders. 
 
 K
 
 U6 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 It is a common occurrence for a new member, on 
 arriving at the table, to shake effusively the hand of 
 the Clerk, which is outstretched to receive the return to 
 the writ. " How nice of the Clerk to greet me so 
 kindly,"" the new member, no doubt, murmurs to him- 
 self, and he gives the hand of that official another 
 hearty shake. Not without some difficulty is it made 
 clear to him by the Clerk, that what is wanted is the 
 blue document he carries in his hand. Occasionally, 
 the return to the writ is missing. This paper, which is 
 sent by the returning officer to the Clerk of the Crown 
 after the election, is given to the new member on 
 application at the Public Business Office, and must be 
 presented to the Clerk at the table, as evidence that he 
 has been duly elected, before the oath can be adminis- 
 tered. As a rule, therefore, a new member takes care 
 that he has got that very necessary document before he 
 starts on the ceremony of initiation. But the stor\ is 
 told that a present very distinguished member of the 
 House of Lords, who was for several years a member of 
 the Lower Chamber, found, on reaching the table to 
 subscribe the oath, that he had not got the essential 
 blue paper. He searched his pockets for the missing 
 document, and in the hurry and confusion to the no 
 little amusement of the watching and deeply interested 
 House threw a number of letters, a purse, some loose 
 coppers and silver, a bunch of keys, and a pipe on the 
 sacred table. But the search was fruitless. He had 
 to retire without having taken the oath. Ultimately 
 the document was found in his hat, which he had left 
 on a bench near the Bar ; and advancing to the table 
 again, amid general cheers and laughter, he got through 
 the initiation without further hitch.
 
 TAKING THE OATH OF ALLEGIANCE 147 
 
 And yet it would seem as if the production of the 
 return to the writ were not absolutely necessary before 
 a new member could take his seat. On March 11, 
 1848, a Mr. Hawes was elected for Kinsale; on the 
 15th he took the oath, and signed the roll ; but it was 
 not until the 18th that the return to the writ was 
 received by the Clerk of the Crown. The Clerk had, 
 through an oversight, neglected to demand the docu- 
 ment of the new member. There was great wagging 
 of official heads when the mistake was discovered. No 
 one could suggest a way out of the difficulty. The 
 Clerk and Mr. Hawes probably went about haunted 
 with visions of the dungeons of the Tower. At last a 
 Committee was appointed to inquire into the matter ; 
 and after due investigation, they reported that the 
 return to the writ had always been required by the 
 House, as "the best evidence of a member's title to 
 be sworn ; " yet " the absence of that proof cannot 
 affect the validity of the election, nor the right of a 
 person duly elected to be held a member of the 
 House." Most sensible decision ! But, nevertheless, 
 the Committee recommended a strict adherence to the 
 practice of requiring the production of the document. 
 It certainly is a picturesque detail in the initiation of a 
 new member.
 
 1 4-8 
 
 CHAFIER VIII 
 MAKING A GOVERNMENT 
 
 PARLIAMENT is now legally constituted. The members 
 of the hereditary House have presented their writs of 
 summons at the table, have sworn allegiance, and sub- 
 scribed the Roll in the presence of the Lord Chancellor. 
 In the representative Chamber, the Speaker has been 
 elected ; the members have taken the oath, and signed 
 the Test Roll. But though everything the written law 
 of the Constitution prescribes for the proper election 
 and due assembly of Parliament has been done, Parlia- 
 ment cannot according to the spirit, if not the forms 
 of the Constitution proceed to the discharge of any 
 of its functions, legislative, administrative, or execu- 
 tive, until a Ministry has been formed, and that sin- 
 gular body, the Cabinet, selected from it. 
 
 But Avhy "singular body 1 '? Are we not all familiar 
 with the Cabinet, and is it not one of the essential 
 institutions of our national polity the main feature of 
 our system of Party Government ? Very true ; but it is 
 a " singular body," nevertheless, because of its curious 
 history, and because it is quite unknown in its corporate 
 capacity to the written or statute law. It was not created 
 by a document drawn up by Parliamentary draftsmen, 
 under the inspiration of a statesman, which subsequently 
 passing through both Houses of the Legislature, and
 
 MAKING A GOVERNMENT 149 
 
 receiving the royal assent, became an Act of Parliament. 
 Indeed, not even the germ of it is to be found in any 
 known statute. It has developed out of the Privy 
 Council, by precedent and custom, by understandings 
 and compromises, according as needs and exigencies 
 arose in the chequered march of the nation to its pre- 
 sent proud position of full and untrammelled constitu- 
 tional liberty. 
 
 The Privy Council was established to advise the 
 Sovereign in grave affairs of State. As time went on 
 it became too unwieldy for consultative purposes, or 
 what is more probable, grew too bold and independent 
 to suit the autocratic views of the Stuart kings, for 
 Charles I. and his successors resorted for advice or 
 rather for servile instruments for their policy to a 
 small group of its most subservient members, who were 
 invested with the highest executive and judicial offices 
 of the State. They met in a small room or cabinet off 
 the Privy Council Chamber, in the royal Palace, and 
 thus came to be called " the Cabinet."" It survived the 
 Revolution of 1688. The Sovereign nominated a council 
 of distinguished members of both Houses of Parliament 
 to aid him as officers of state in the government of the 
 realm. The Cabinet did not, for a long period after 
 the Revolution, necessarily consist of statesmen belong- 
 ing to the same political party. A Tory Lord Chan- 
 cellor, or a Tory Secretary of State, was often brought 
 by the Sovereign into a Cabinet otherwise composed of 
 \Yhigs. It was not, indeed, until about the middle of 
 the last century that the Cabinet really became what it 
 is now a Committee or Council of the leaders of the 
 political party in a majority in the House of Commons, 
 selected for the offices they fill, not, as hitherto, by the
 
 150 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Sovereign, but by the principal leader of the party, as 
 Prime Minister, and in general agreement as to political 
 opinions, following a common policy in the administra- 
 tion of the affairs of the realm, and with a collective 
 responsibility to Parliament, or rather to the House of 
 Commons, for its actions. The Cabinet also grew 
 slowly in power and authority during the eighteenth 
 centmy. Indeed the total abeyance of the uncon- 
 trolled exercise of the prerogatives of the Crown by the 
 Sovereign, personally, and the rise of the Cabinet to its 
 present position of practically supreme power in the 
 State, were riot witnessed till the present reign. 
 
 If the existing Government finds itself in a minority 
 after the General Election, it may bow at once to the 
 will of the country, and resign, or it may wait until 
 ejected from office by a vote of want of confidence, 
 passed by the House of Commons. But when it tenders 
 its resignation to the Sovereign, the duty of forming a 
 new administration is entrusted by the Sovereign to the 
 Leader of the Opposition. According to the theory of 
 the Constitution, the Sovereign may send for any one he 
 pleases ; but in practice there is seldom any freedom of 
 choice. The chief leader of a party is not nominated 
 or formally elected by his followers. The only instance 
 of a leader being elected or appointed at a meeting of 
 a party is that of Lord Hartington, as chief of the 
 Liberal party, on the retirement of Mr. Gladstone in 
 1875 a retirement which was intended to be per- 
 manent, but only proved temporary though on that 
 occasion there was no vote, as the other candidates for 
 the position withdrew. The leader, as a rule, comes 
 gradually to the front by sheer force of ability and 
 strength of will, and it is this acknowledged chief of the
 
 MAKIN'G A GOVERXMFA'T 1.11 
 
 party chosen thus by a process of natural selection, 
 and not by any direct vote for whom the Sovereign 
 sends, and commands to form a new Ministry. 
 
 The Prime Minister who, like the body of which he 
 is the head, is unknown to the law is, in turn, not 
 unfettered in the choice of his colleagues in the Ad- 
 ministration. He is obliged to select them from among 
 the most able, or rather the most prominent, members 
 of his party. Mr. Gladstone, who formed no fewer 
 than four Administrations and Cabinets an almost 
 unprecedented record for one man in our constitutional 
 history used to draw up on slips of paper a list of the 
 various offices, placing opposite each, as alternatives, 
 the names of three or four more or less eligible states- 
 men, and then, by a process of sifting, he arrived at the 
 definite list. But this process of sifting, which all 
 Prime Ministers have to adopt, is not at all the simple 
 matter it looks. It has to be followed out with exceed- 
 ing care and circumspection. For every post in the 
 Ministry there are at least three or four claimants all 
 of them leading members of the party, each of whom 
 thinks the office on which he has his eye ought to be 
 his by every title of personal fitness and of services 
 rendered to the party. The old men the men who 
 were members of the Government when the party was 
 last in office naturally think they ought not to be 
 overlooked in the formation of the new Administration 
 and Cabinet, and the young men able, pushing, and 
 ambitious who have come to the front in the interval, 
 and are rather jealous of "the old gang," also look for 
 some of the spoils of office. To adjust these rival 
 claims is not an easy task for the Prime Minister. 
 The claimants for office insist on personal interviews
 
 152 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 to advance their respective claims ; and every post 
 brings shoals of letters from members of Parliament 
 and leading politicians in the country, strongly urging 
 the appointment of this one or that one to a place in 
 the Ministry, or his inclusion in the Cabinet. 
 
 It is interesting to note what Disraeli once said re- 
 garding the difficulties attending the formation of an 
 Administration. He spoke of it in a speech in the 
 House of Commons in March 1873, as "a work of 
 great time, great labour, and of great responsibility. " 
 Then the construction of a Ministry, he added, fell 
 entirely on the individual entrusted with its forma- 
 tion. 
 
 It is a duty which can be delegated to no one [he says]. 
 All the correspondence and all the interviews must be 
 conducted by himself, and without dwelling on the sense of 
 responsibility involved, the perception of fitness requisite, 
 and the severe impartiality necessary in deciding on con- 
 tending claims, the mere physical effort is not slight. 
 
 We may well believe it. 
 
 It is an odd thing to see a Ministry making [wrote 
 Macaulay to his sister Hannah, December 1<), 1845]. I 
 never witnessed the process before. Lord John Russell 
 has been all day in his inner library. His ante-chamber 
 has been filled with comers and goers, some talking in 
 knots, some writing notes at tables. Every five minutes 
 somebody is called into the inner room. As the people 
 who have been closeted come out, the cry of the whole 
 body of expectants is, "What are you ? " I was summoned 
 almost as soon as I arrived and found Lord Auckland and 
 Lord Clarendon sitting with Lord John. After some talk 
 about other matters, Lord John told me that he had 
 been trying to ascertain my wishes, and that he found I
 
 MAKING A GOVERNMENT ]>.'! 
 
 wanted leisure and quiet more than salary and business. 
 Labouchere had told him this. He therefore offered me 
 the Pay Office, one of the three places which, as I have 
 told you, I should prefer. I at once accepted it. 
 
 But this Ministry was fated not to be formed. Both 
 Lord Grey and Lord Pahnerston two leading members 
 of the Whig Party wanted the Foreign Office, and 
 neither would give way to the other. 
 
 All is over [wrote Macaulay to his sister, the very next 
 day]. Late at night, just as I was undressing, a knock was 
 given at the door of my chambers. A messenger had come 
 from Lord John with a short note. The quarrel between 
 Lord Grey and Lord Palmerston had made it impossible to 
 form a Ministry. I went to bed and slept sound. 
 
 It is probably as annoying to an expectant Minister 
 to be offered what he considers to be, for himself, an 
 inferior post in the Administration as to be entirely 
 ignored. Sir Robert Peel, in making a Government, 
 December 1834, offered Lord Ashley (subsequently the 
 Earl of Shaftesbury) a seat on the Board of Admiralty, 
 which Lord Ashley thought altogether beneath him, 
 and therefore refused. 
 
 Had I not [he wrote in his diary] by God's grace and 
 the study of religion subdued the passion of my youth, I 
 should now have been heartbroken. Canning, eight years 
 ago, offered me, as a neophyte, a seat at one of the Boards, 
 the first step in a young statesman's life. If I am not now 
 worthy of more, it is surely better to cease to be a candi- 
 date for public honours. Yet Peel's letter, so full of flum- 
 mery, would lead any one to believe that I was a host of 
 excellency. The thing is a contradiction.
 
 I.H THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 However, he accepted the post subsequently. He 
 was satisfied that it was of higher rank, or more im- 
 portant, than he at first supposed. 
 
 In 1839 Peel was again engaged in making a Govern- 
 ment. The Queen, who at this time had hardly been 
 two years on the throne, was only twenty years of age. 
 Peel asked Lord Ashley to accept a post in the Royal 
 Household, urging, as a reason for the offer, that he 
 desired to have around " this young woman, on whose 
 moral and religious character depends the welfare o 
 millions of human beings,"" persons whose character and 
 conversation would tend to her moral improvement. 
 Lord Ashley confesses that he was thunderstruck when 
 he received Peel's letter, as he expected a far higher 
 position than " a mere court puppet ; "" but in his replv 
 to Peel he said, somewhat sarcastically, that if Peel 
 desired it, he would accept " the office of chief scullion 
 to the court." However, this Administration was not 
 formed. It was wrecked on what is known as "the 1 Jed- 
 chamber question." Some of the ladies of the J bed- 
 chamber, who were most closely in attendance upon the 
 Queen, were related to the outgoing Whig Ministers. 1>\ 
 whom they had been appointed, and Peel insisted upon 
 their resignation. The Queen refused to consent to such 
 a course, as contrary to usage and repugnant to her 
 feelings, and, Peel thereupon refusing to form an Ad- 
 ministration, the Melbourne Ministry were recalled to 
 office. Two years later Peel was again forming an 
 Administration this time the Queen raised no objec- 
 tion to the Mistress of the Robes being changed and 
 again he offered Lord Ashley a place in the Royal 
 Household on similar grounds. Lord Ashley now 
 believed that -Peel simply wanted to muzzle him, the
 
 MAKING A GOVERNMENT 155 
 
 leader of the growing movement for the State regula- 
 tion of factories; and he therefore refused the office. "I 
 told Peel," he wrote, " the case was altered, the court 
 was no longer the same ; the Queen was two years older, 
 had a child, and a husband to take care of her." To 
 Lord Ashley's mortification, he discovered subsequently 
 that Peel had already offered the post of Vice-Chamber- 
 lain in the Household to Lord - - (" the hero of 
 Madame Grisi," as Lord Ashley describes him) ; but 
 Lord - , not desiring the post, exclaimed, when the 
 offer was made to him, " Thank God, my character is 
 loo bad for a Household place." 1 From this Lord Ashley 
 argued that " morality, therefore, was not the reason 
 for putting me at court." 
 
 But the time came when office had lost its charm for 
 the Earl of Shaftesbury. On January 27, 1855, the 
 coalition Government of Lord Aberdeen and Lord John 
 Russell were defeated on a vote of censure charging 
 them with the mismanagement of the Crimean War, and 
 they resigned. Lord Palmerston received the commands 
 of the Queen to form an Administration. He, too, 
 desired to have a Ministry of both Liberals and Conser- 
 vatives. On February 7 he wrote to Shaftesbury, a 
 Conservative, offering him the Chancellorship of the 
 Duchy of Lancaster with a seat in the Cabinet. That 
 was in the morning. In the afternoon Shaftesbury 
 received a brief note from Palmerston requesting 
 him to " consider the offer as suspended," in conse- 
 quence of unforeseen difficulties, which it subsequently 
 transpired were the claims of the Liberals for a 
 greater share of place and power in the new Govern- 
 ment. This explanation came to Shaftesbury from 
 Ladv Palmerston.
 
 ]/>fi THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Palmerston is distracted with all the worry he lias to go 
 through [she wrote. And in a P.S. she added :] It is no 
 pleasure to form a Government when there are so many 
 unreasonable people to please, and so many interested 
 people pressing for their own gratification and vanity with- 
 out any regard to the public good or the interests of the 
 Government and country. 
 
 The Earl of Shaftesbury thus poured out his soul on 
 the subject to his son : 
 
 The selfishness, the meanness, the love of place and salary, 
 the oblivion of the country, of man's welfare, and God's 
 honour have never been more striking and terrible than in 
 this crisis. These, added to the singular conceit of all the 
 candidates for office (and all have aspired to the highest) 
 have thrown stumbling-blocks in Palmerston's path at every 
 step. The greediness and vanity of our place-hunters have 
 combined to make each one of them a union of the vulture 
 and the peacock. 
 
 Shaftesbury himself had then no desire for place. It 
 is impossible to doubt the genuineness of the congratu- 
 lations on his "escape from office ""in which he indulged. 
 In March some of the members of the Administration 
 resigned, and Palmerston again offered Shaftesbury the 
 Chancellorship of the Duchy of Lancaster. But Shaftes- 
 bury was still reluctant. " I could not satisfy myself, 1 '' 
 he said, " that to accept office was a divine call. I was 
 satisfied that God had called me to labour among the 
 poor." One morning he received this note from Lady 
 Palmerston : " Palmerston is very anxious now that you 
 should put on your undress uniform and be at the Palace 
 a quarter before three, to be sworn in. Pray do this, 
 and I am sure you will not repent it." Shaftesbury
 
 MAKING A GOVERNMENT 157 
 
 gave way to these pleading entreaties. The result was 
 certainly curious. 
 
 I went and dressed [he wrote in his diary], and then, 
 while I was waiting for the carriage, I went down on my 
 knees and prayed for counsel, wisdom, and understanding. 
 Then there was some one at the door as I thought, to say 
 that the carriage was ready. But instead of that a note, 
 hurriedly written in pencil, was put into my hand. It 
 was from Palmerston " Don't go to the Palace." 
 
 Many would have groaned in the anguish of their 
 souls over this stunning disappointment. Shaftesbury 
 declares he danced with joy. "It was to my mind,'" he 
 said, " as distinctly an act of special providence as when 
 the hand of Abraham was stayed and Isaac escaped.'" 
 
 As will be seen from these extracts from the letters 
 and diaries of Lord Macaulay and the Earl of Shaftes- 
 bury, the " fishing for seals, v as it is called in political 
 circles, goes on briskly during the fortnight it usually 
 takes to form an Administration. The " seals of office,* 1 
 about which people read so much in their favourite 
 newspapers on the advent of a new Government, are 
 small metal discs, engraved with some image or device, 
 enclosed in a velvet case, which are surrendered into 
 the hands of the Queen by the outgoing Ministry, 
 and subsequently distributed by her Majesty to the 
 members of the incoming Administration. The seals 
 are never used, and probably a Minister never sees them 
 from the day he enters upon office to the day he goes 
 out of it. 
 
 By a curious coincidence the last Bill passed by the 
 late Liberal Government, after their defeat in the House 
 of Commons in June 1895, wa.s the Seal Fisheries Bill,
 
 158 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 which applies to the fisheries of the Behring Seas. A 
 few days afterwards, Lord Rosebery, while riding in 
 Hyde Park, met a Conservative member who had 
 adopted a rather critical attitude towards the measure. 
 " Well," said the ex-Premier, " we got through with the 
 Seal Fisheries Bill after all."" " Yes, thanks to my for- 
 bearance,"" responded the Conservative member. "I am 
 glad of it," continued Lord Roseberv, " for there will be 
 great fishing for seals these days."" 1 Another good story 
 about seals is ascribed to Lord Plunket, who in the 
 Twenties was Lord Chancellor of Ireland. By one of 
 those rather shabby intrigues which occasionally accom- 
 panies Cabinet-making, Lord Plunket was hustled out 
 of the Irish Chancellorship to make room for Lord 
 Campbell. The day that Lord Campbell was to cro>s 
 over to Ireland in order to take up his ill-won post 
 was very stormy, and Plunket and his secretary were 
 looking out upon the tossing sea from his lordship's 
 marine residence near Dublin. " I suppose Ixml Camp- 
 bell must be very sea-sick," said the secretary. " No 
 doubt,"" replied Plunket, " but alas, he won't throw up 
 the Great Seal." An amusing story is also told in 
 Massey's " History of the Reign of George III." tijjrujwx 
 of the seals of office. On the downfall of the famous 
 Coalition Ministry in 1783, North and Fox, the leaders 
 of the united Tories and Whigs, received his Majesty's 
 peremptory command to resign their seals of office, and 
 so obnoxious had they made themselves to the King by 
 resisting his will, that they were denied the customary 
 audience for the purpose. They were ordered to send 
 their seals by their Under Secretaries of State. 
 
 Lord North received his dismissal with characteristic 
 humour [writes the historian]. He was in bed when, at
 
 MAKING A GOVERNMENT 159 
 
 twelve o'clock at night, the dispatch arrived ; and being 
 informed that Sir Evan Keapen, the Under Secretary, 
 desired to see him, he replied, that in that case Sir Evan 
 must see Lady North too ; and he positively refused to rise. 
 Sir Evan Avas accordingly admitted to the bedroom ; and 
 on informing Lord North that he came by his Majesty's 
 command to demand the seals of his office, Lord North 
 gave him the key of the closet where they were kept and 
 turned round to sleep. 
 
 The Administration being at last formed, a day is h'xed 
 by the Queen for the visit of the outgoing and incoming 
 Ministers to Windsor. On the morning of the day, the 
 Clerk to the Privy Council collects all the seals from the 
 different offices and takes them down to Windsor Castle. 
 The outgoing Ministers go down later in the day. Each 
 Minister then takes his seal, and in the Council Chamber, 
 where the Sovereign sits enthroned, surrenders it into 
 the hands of the Queen, who places it on a table by her 
 side. An hour later the new Ministers arrive at the 
 Castle, when each in turn kneels before her Majesty, 
 and receives from her hands the seals previously surren- 
 dered by the outgoing Ministers. Thus by the delivering 
 of the insignia of office does the Sovereign ratify the 
 selections of the Prime Minister for the various posts in 
 the Administration. 
 
 Lord Campbell tells us in his diary that in 1859, as 
 the members of Lord Palmerston's Administration, in 
 which he held the office of Lord Chancellor, were going 
 down to Windsor by special train, they passed another 
 express returning to London with the outgoing Premier, 
 Lord Derby, and his colleagues. " What an opening for 
 aspiring young statesmen if a wicked wag of a railway 
 director had ordered the two trains to be put on the
 
 160 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 same line," was the genial comment of the Lord Chan- 
 cellor. Sir Stafford Northcote (Lord Iddesleigh), who 
 was a Minister in the next Derby Administration, which 
 was formed in July 1866, also gives us some interest- 
 ing glimpses of the proceedings at Windsor Castle on the 
 occasion of -a change of Government. 
 
 Queen's carriages met us at the terminus and took us to 
 the Castle [he writes]. As we went upstairs we met the 
 late Ministers coming down, and shook hands with them. 
 While we were waiting in the long room there was a sharp 
 thunderstorm, and there was another while we were at 
 luncheon, after taking office. The slopes of the terrace 
 looked as if there had been a fall of snow. Some thought 
 this a bad omen for us. Disraeli had a bad omen of his 
 own as we came down ; for, thinking there was a seat at 
 the end of the saloon carriage, he sat down there, and 
 found himself unexpectedly on the floor. 
 
 The Administration lasted scarcely two years; but 
 despite the ill-omened accident to Disraeli, it was for 
 that statesman a fortunate Administration. In it he 
 first filled the great office of Prime Minister, to which 
 he succeeded on the resignation of Lord Derby, on 
 account of failing health, early in 1868. 
 
 But to return to Windsor Castle. Sir Stafford North- 
 cote goes on to say : 
 
 Lord Derby was first sent for by the Queen, and had a 
 short audience. We were then all taken along the corridor 
 to the door of a small room or, rather, closet. Lord Derby, 
 Lord Chelmsford, and Walpole were called in ; then the 
 five new members of the Privy Council Duke of Buck- 
 ingham, Carnarvon, Cranborne, Hardy, and 1 were called 
 in together, and knelt before the Queen while we took the
 
 MAKING A GOVERNMENT 161 
 
 oath of allegiance ; then we kissed hands, rose, and took 
 the Privy Councillor's oath standing. The Queen then 
 named the Duke of Buckingham Lord President of the 
 Council, and we all retired. The Prince of Wales and 
 Duke of Edinburgh were in the room. We were then 
 called in one by one, and kissed hands on appointment to 
 office, Lord Derby going first, then the Lord Chancellor, 
 the Lord President, the Lord Privy Seal, the Secretaries 
 of State (all together), the Chancellor of the Exchequer, &c. 
 The seals were delivered to all these, except the Lord 
 President. Lord Derby then had a long audience with the 
 Queen, while we went to luncheon. Returned by special 
 train at four o'clock. 
 
 Finally, Sir Stafford makes this comment on the 
 ceremony : 
 
 The swearing-in was much less impressive than it is said 
 to have been formerly. After being sworn, we shook hands 
 with each Privy Councillor present. This, in a large room 
 with a full Council, was no doubt a more solemn under- 
 taking than in a Council of only three members huddled 
 up in a tiny room, with the rest outside the door. The 
 Queen seemed very cheerful, but said nothing, except as to 
 one or two details of arrangement. 
 
 Everything has now been completed according to 
 long established custom. The Administration is duly 
 appointed ; the hierarchy of the Cabinet is selected. 
 The Cabinet consists of at least eleven and generally 
 not more than fourteen of the principal Ministers, 
 divided between the two Houses of Parliament. An 
 important constitutional innovation has been introduced 
 by Lord Salisbury, the present Prime Minister. A large 
 Cabinet of nineteen Ministers has been created ; but a 
 committee of four, including the Prime Minister, attends 
 
 L
 
 162 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 to the most important and urgent matters of Govern- 
 ment and party policy. As the Privy Council became 
 too large for the speedy and secret transaction of deli- 
 cate and critical State affairs, the Cabinet was formed ; 
 so now the creation of a big unwieldy Cabinet has led 
 to the appointment of an " inner circle," to which only 
 ' a few of the leading Ministers are admitted. The 
 arrangement has several advantages. Prompt action 
 can be taken in matters of foreign and home policy, in 
 which the race is always to the swift, without having to 
 wait for the sanction of a big body that takes longer 
 to assemble. Another advantage of this system is 
 that a Prime Minister can reward a large number of 
 " eminent nobodies " in his party with the coveted 
 prize of Cabinet office without being embarrassed with 
 their advice. 
 
 The meetings of the Cabinet are summoned by the 
 Prime Minister through his private secretary. A 
 summons to the Cabinet runs thus : 
 
 A meeting of her Majesty's servants will be held at No. 
 10, Downing Street, at o'clock, on , 
 
 at which is desired to attend. 
 
 The old Cabinet room in 10 Downing Street (the 
 official residence of the First Lord of the Treasury) is 
 oblong in shape, and measures about fifty feet by twenty 
 feet. It is furnished as a library, and is fitted with 
 double doors through which no sound can penetrate, 
 and which are therefore quite proof against any eaves- 
 dropper. The furniture of the apartment is more solid 
 than showy. The table at which the Ministers sit is a 
 substantial one, some ten feet wide, and when a Cabinet 
 meets, is covered with a green cloth, while a blotting-
 
 MAKING A GOVERNMENT 163 
 
 pad, paper, and a plentiful supply of pens are placed in 
 front of each chair. On a side table are a plateful of 
 biscuits, a bottle of water and some glasses. This is 
 the only refreshment allowed at a Cabinet meeting. 
 The windows of the room look out upon a small garden 
 surrounded by a brick wall ; and two of them open upon 
 a rough stone terrace, with an iron railing, where 
 Ministers were wont to air themselves during their 
 more or less momentous deliberations. 
 
 This has been the usual meeting-place of the Cabinet 
 since the beginning of the century. All or nearly all 
 of Mr. Gladstone's many Cabinet Councils have been 
 held there. But it is hardly large enough to accom- 
 modate a Cabinet of seventeen Ministers, and in the 
 case of the present Administration, the Prime Minister 
 not being First Lord of the Treasurv, but Secretary of 
 
 v ' if 
 
 State for Foreign Affairs, the meetings are held in the 
 Foreign Secretary's apartment in the Foreign Office. 
 
 Differences of opinion, are, of course, inevitable at a 
 Cabinet meeting. But when once a question has been 
 decided by the vote of the majority, every member of 
 the Cabinet becomes equally responsible for the decision. 
 If a Minister finds he cannot conscientiously support 
 the policy his colleagues have adopted, he must resign 
 office. In that event the Prime Minister appoints 
 somebody else to the vacant post, and things go on, as a 
 rule, as if nothing had happened. But if the Prime 
 Minister should resign from any cause, the Cabinet is 
 really dissolved, and a new Cabinet is formed by the 
 succeeding Premier, as happened when Lord Melbourne 
 succeeded Earl Grey in 1834, Mr. Disraeli Lord Derby 
 in 1868, and Lord Rosebery Mr. Gladstone in 1893. 
 No regular minutes of the meetings of the Cabinet are
 
 164 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 kept. Memoranda in regard to Bills to be introduced, 
 and announcements to be made to Parliament, are, 
 however, drawn up for the guidance of the Ministers to 
 whose departments the matters in question relate. 
 
 The deliberations of the Cabinet are strictly private 
 and confidential. Its members are, as Privy Councillors, 
 sworn to secrecy. They are not at liberty to divulge 
 anything that passes at its meetings without the express 
 permission of the Sovereign. Nevertheless, proceedings 
 at Cabinet meetings occasionally filter through, in one 
 way or another, to the eager public. The memoirs of 
 Charles Greville, Clerk to the Privy Council, show that 
 Ministers of Lord Melbourne's Administration kept 
 that entertaining political and social gossiper acquainted 
 with the proceedings of the Cabinet. The " Memoirs of 
 Lord Palmerston " are also full of confidential correspon- 
 dence on the discussions and resolutions of that august 
 and secret conclave. Lord Ellenborough, who sat in the 
 Wellington-Peel Cabinet of 1828-30, which ultimately 
 emancipated the Roman Catholics, kept a diary in 
 which he not only minutely recorded the proceedings of 
 the Cabinet but delivered himself of some very caustic 
 criticisms of his colleagues. Peel was " captious," Hus- 
 kisson " untrustworthy ," Palmerston " always pecking." 
 He also relates that Lord Lyndhurst, who was Lord 
 Chancellor in that Government, thought that no 
 Cabinets should be held after dinner. " We all drink 
 too much wine," said he, "and are not civil to each 
 other." Three months subsequently Lord Ellenborough 
 made a record which would go to prove the truth of 
 Lord Lyndhursfs opinion. "A great deal of useless 
 talk, a large portion of which originated in Lord 
 Bathurst being rather drunk."
 
 MAKING A GOVERNMENT 165 
 
 Walter Bagehot, in his " English Constitution," relates 
 the well-known story of Lord Melbourne at a Cabinet 
 Council at which it was agreed to propose a fixed duty 
 on corn. Lord Melbourne put his back to the door 
 and said, " Now is it to lower the price of corn, or isn't 
 it ? It is not much matter what we say, but mind, we 
 must all say the same ! " " This," writes Bagehot "Is 
 the most graphic story of a Cabinet I have heard, but I 
 cannot vouch for its truth. Lord Melbourne is a 
 character about which men make stories. 1 ' 1 Another 
 story goes that when any difficult or hazardous question 
 was propounded to Lord Melbourne by any of his 
 colleagues in the Cabinet, he used to ask, " Can't you 
 let it alone ? " and followed up the question with this 
 caution : " Whenever you are in doubt what should be 
 done, do nothing." The late Sir William Gregory 
 gives in his autobiography, on the authority of "a 
 member of Lord Palmerston's Cabinet," another in- 
 teresting glimpse into the Council chamber of the 
 Cabinet. According to this authority Mr. Gladstone 
 came to the meetings of the Cabinet of the Palmerston 
 Administrations at the end of each recess, charged to 
 the muzzle with all sorts of schemes of reform, which 
 were absolutely necessary, in his opinion, to be imme- 
 diately undertaken. Lord Palmerston used to look 
 fixedly at the paper before him, saying nothing until 
 the outpourings of Mr. Gladstone had come to an end. 
 He then rapped the table and said cheerfully, " Now, 
 my lords and gentlemen, let us go to business."
 
 166 
 
 CHAPTER IX 
 HER MAJESTY'S MINISTERS 
 
 THE salaries and emoluments of "her Majesty^ Minis- 
 ters'" cost the taxpayers of the kingdom just ,175,681 
 per year, a sum by no means extravagant when we con- 
 sider the genius and ability of our statesmen, their 
 devotion to duty, and the vastness and wealth of the 
 Empire. As late as seventy years ago three times that 
 amount hardly covered the egregious salaries of members 
 of the Government, and what was more reprehensible, 
 the fat sinecures bestowed on needy unofficial members 
 of the House, and even on persons outside, for party 
 services. Over a century ago the state of things that 
 prevailed in public life was even more corrupt and venal. 
 Place-hunting was then almost universal amongst public 
 men. 
 
 To grasp a great estate out of the public service was too 
 often their first thought [writes Sir Thomas May in his 
 " Constitutional History of England "] ; families were 
 founded, titles endowed, and broken fortunes repaired at 
 the public expense. It was asked what an office was 
 worth, not what services were to be rendered. 
 
 In fact, the aristocratic oligarchy that then filled 
 all the great places of the State regarded the Govern- 
 ment offices, and the power and emoluments which they 
 carried, as their hereditary perquisites.
 
 HER MAJESTY'S MINISTERS 167 
 
 Edmund Burke, whose efforts to bring about economic 
 reform in the administration of the affairs of the king- 
 dom, led to the abolition of many of these sinecures, 
 fees, and allowances, insisted, nevertheless, that adequate 
 compensation should be paid to Ministers for their 
 services. 
 
 I will even go so far as to affirm [he said] that if men were 
 willing to serve in such situations without salary, they 
 ought not to be permitted to do it. Ordinary service 
 must be secured by the motives to ordinary integrity. I 
 do not hesitate to say that that State which lays its founda- 
 tion in rare and heroic virtues will be sure to have its 
 superstructure in the basest profligacy and corruption. An 
 honourable and fair profit is the best security against 
 avarice and rapacity, as in all things else a lawful and 
 regulated enjoyment is the best security against de- 
 bauchery and excess. 
 
 The present salaries were fixed in 1831, on the recom- 
 mendation of a Committee of the House of Commons, 
 which was appointed by the Grey Ministry or the 
 Reform Ministry on their accession to office in 1830. 
 In 1850, the salaries again underwent examination by 
 another committee, which reported that the 1831 settle- 
 ment was the " lowest amount which is consistent with 
 the requirements of the public service. 11 
 
 The Prime Minister, or the head of the Government, 
 receives as such no salary, for his position is unknown 
 to and unrecognised by statute law. Some State office 
 with nominal duties, such as the office of First Lord of 
 the Treasury, is accordingly held by the Premier. Lord 
 Salisbury, however, departed from the almost invariable 
 practice by associating the Secretaryship for Foreign 
 Affairs, perhaps the most arduous and responsible office
 
 168 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 in the Government, with the Premiership in his own 
 person. The First Lord of the Treasury, or, as he is 
 more fully described, "First Commissioner for executing 
 the office of the Lord High Treasurer of her Majesty's 
 Exchequer," has associated with him the Chancellor of 
 the Exchequer and three junior Lords of the Treasury 
 in the control of her Majesty's Exchequer. The post 
 is now a sinecure in the departmental sense. There are 
 no Treasury duties attached to it, and yet it carries 
 with it a salary of 5000 per annum. The First Lord 
 of the Treasury has also a large patronage. He is, for 
 instance, the Minister upon whose advice pensions are 
 granted from the Civil List to persons who have ac- 
 cording to a resolution of the House of Commons, 
 adopted February 18, 1834, for the regulation of such 
 pensions "just claims on the royal beneficence, or who 
 by their personal services to the Crown, by the perform- 
 ance of duties to the public, or by their useful discoveries 
 in science and attainments in literature and the arts, 
 have merited the gracious consideration of their Sove- 
 reign or the gratitude of their country."" For this 
 purpose a sum of 1%00 is granted to her Majesty each 
 year, in addition to the pensions already in force. All 
 the pensions now in operation, under the Civil List, 
 amount to about ^23,000. The fresh grants are 
 annually laid before Parliament, and are subject to 
 criticism. 
 
 The real head of the Treasury, or the department 
 which controls the collection and expenditure of the 
 national revenue, is the Chancellor of the Exchequer. 
 The salary attached to the office is 5000 a year. The 
 office of Chancellor of the Exchequer is always held by 
 a member of the House of Commons, in which House
 
 HER MAJESTY'S MINISTERS 169 
 
 all proceedings relating to the public income and public 
 expenditure must originate. It is his business to see 
 that no more money is asked for from Parliament than 
 is required for the needs of the State, and that no 
 more money is spent by the Departments than has 
 been authorised by Parliament. He has a seat in the 
 Cabinet. 
 
 The "titbit" of the Administration from the financial 
 point of view is the Lord Chancellorship. The salary 
 attached to the office is ^10,000^4000 as Speaker of 
 the House of Lords and ^6000 as Lord Chancellor. In 
 point of precedence it is also the highest office in the 
 Government. The Lord High Chancellor of Great 
 Britain takes precedence of every other subject of the 
 Queen, except the royal dukes and the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury. The First Lord of the Treasury who as 
 I have shown is usually the head of the Government 
 so far from being in point of precedence the first in the 
 Cabinet, is nearly half-way down. So that at a cere- 
 monial function Mr. Gladstone, when Premier, would 
 have had to walk behind five or six men whom he had 
 appointed to Cabinet office, and whom he could, in 
 effect, dismiss. Lord Rosebery was First Lord of the 
 Treasury in the late Liberal Administration, but held 
 also the office of Lord President of the Council, which 
 gave him formal precedence before all his colleagues 
 except the Lord Chancellor. The latter office is also 
 the oldest in the Government. It dates back to the 
 time of Edward the Confessor. The Lord Chancellor is 
 besides, as head of the Chancery Division of the Supreme 
 Court of Judicature, the highest judicial officer in the 
 land. As Speaker of the House of Lords, he presides 
 over that House when it is sitting either as a judicial or
 
 J70 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 as a legislative body. He appoints all justices of the 
 peace in counties, on the recommendation of the Lords 
 Lieutenants and in boroughs on the recommendation of 
 the Home Secretary, and he is supposed to exercise a 
 general guardianship over infants, lunatics, and idiots. 
 He has at his disposal an immense amount of patronage. 
 He appoints all the judges of the Superior Courts save 
 the Lord Chief Justice, whose office is in the gift of the 
 Prime Minister, and also the judges of the county courts. 
 He has besides the right of presentation to Crown livings 
 of %0 and less. Finally, he is " Lord Keeper of the 
 Great Seal," 11 and is always a member of the Cabinet. 
 The office is subject to a religious disability. The Lord 
 Chancellor must receive the sacrament after the ritual 
 of the Church of England and must take an oath abjur- 
 ing the doctrine of transubstantiation. 
 
 The Lord President of the Council presides on the 
 rare occasions that the Privy Council now meets. When 
 the Queen is present at a meeting in Council the Lord 
 President takes his place at her Majesty's right hand. 
 In past years he was the president of certain committees 
 of the Privy Council which are now defunct. In 1837, 
 when Lord John Russell made the first attempt to 
 establish a system of national education, a committee of 
 that venerable body was appointed to administer the 
 moneys which Parliament voted for the purpose, and 
 over its deliberations the Lord President presided. In 
 1855 a new office was created that of Vice-president of 
 the Council which in time became vested with all the 
 administrative duties of the Lords of the Education 
 Board. In like manner the duties of the Council in 
 regard to trade have long since been discharged by the 
 Board of Trade, and its duties in regard to public health
 
 HER MAJESTY'S MINISTERS 171 
 
 have gone to the Local Government Board. Again, till 
 recently, the Lord President exercised all the statutory 
 powers of the Privy Council in connection with the pre- 
 vention of cattle disease. The creation, a few years ago, 
 of a Board of Agriculture took that work out of his 
 hands and left him with few duties that were not formal. 
 But the office has now been entrusted with novel and 
 important functions. The Lord President of the 
 Council in the present Unionist Administration the 
 Duke of Devonshire presides over a national defence 
 committee, which aims at bringing into harmony of 
 purpose the independent energies of the War Office and 
 the Admiralty. The post carries a salary of 5000. 
 
 The office of Lord Privy Seal is an ornamental survival 
 from the historic past when the Privy Council sought to 
 restrain the acts of the Crown by insisting that the 
 Lord Chancellor should not affix the imprimatur of the 
 Great Seal to any grant, or patent, or writ the Sovereign 
 desired to issue, without their authorisation in the form 
 of a warrant under the Privy Seal. But in these happy 
 days of Parliamentary government, the Lord Privy Seal 
 has no departmental duties and no salary. The office 
 is generally bestowed upon an experienced and eminent 
 peer whose counsel is desired at the deliberations of the 
 Cabinet. 
 
 There are five principal Secretaries of State the 
 Secretary for the Home Department, or the Home 
 Secretary, as he is popularly styled ; the Secretary for 
 Foreign Affairs, or Foreign Secretary ; the Secretary for 
 India ; the Secretary for the Colonies ; and the Secretary 
 for War. They are members of the Cabinet, and each 
 receives 5000 per annum for his services. The Home 
 Secretary is invariably in the House of Commons.
 
 172 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Though the predominance of the elected Chamber 
 necessitates that a larger proportion of Cabinet Minis- 
 ters should have seats there than in the hereditary 
 Chamber, the holders of the other Secretaryships of 
 State may be either in the House of Lords or in the 
 House of Commons ; but in either event, the Under- 
 Secretaryship, which is attached to each of the offices, 
 represents it in the other House. These Under-Secre- 
 taries are each paid ="1500 per annum. They are 
 never members of the Cabinet. The duties of the five 
 Secretaries of State being easily understood, need no 
 extended explanation. 
 
 Until 1854 there were only three Secretaries of State 
 the Home Secretary, who has under his control the 
 police and the general administration of justice, ad- 
 vises the exercise of the prerogative of mercy or the 
 clemency of the Crown, is responsible for the preserva- 
 tion of the public peace and for the security of life and 
 property in England and Wales, and supervises the 
 working of the various statutes regulating labour; 
 the Foreign Secretary, who controls everything apper- 
 taining to the relations of this country with foreign 
 States ; and the Secretary for War, who, in addition to 
 administering the affairs of the army, had to look after 
 colonial matters until 1854, when the development of 
 our possessions abroad led to the creation of a Secretary 
 of State for the Colonies. In 1858, the year that 
 witnessed the transfer of the powers of the East India 
 Company, or " John Company," by Act of Parliament, 
 to the Imperial Government, the fifth Secretary of State 
 was appointed to take charge of the affairs of India. 
 The Constitution recognises no distinction among the 
 Secretaries of State. The holder of any one of these
 
 HER MAJESTY'S MINISTERS 173 
 
 five offices is simply described as " one of her Majesty's 
 principal Secretaries of State, 11 and theoretically their 
 duties are interchangeable. A Secretary of State must 
 always be present in London. 
 
 The salary of the First Lord of the Admiralty, who 
 is responsible for the navy, is ,4500. The post is 
 regarded, curiously enough, as of lower rank than the 
 office of the Minister for War, who, as we have seen, 
 has the distinction of being a Secretary for State, and 
 draws ^5000 per annum. The First Lord, however, 
 has a seat in the Cabinet. 
 
 The Chief Secretary for Ireland receives a salary of 
 =4425. There are also three Irish law-officers the 
 Lord Chancellor, who gets ,8000 a year ; the Attorney- 
 General, who is paid 5000 ; and the Solicitor-General, 
 who has 2000. They need not necessarily be in either 
 House of Parliament. None of the Irish law-officers in 
 the late Liberal Government were members of Parlia- 
 ment ; but in the present Unionist Administration the 
 Attorney-General and the Solicitor-General are in the 
 House of Commons, and the Lord Chancellor, who has 
 a seat in the Cabinet, is in the House of Lords. The 
 highest paid office in the Administration is that of the 
 Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, who receives a salary of 
 20,000. But it is a post few noblemen care to accept 
 for various reasons, not the least being that, like the 
 position of Lord Mayor of London, the allowance is 
 not nearly sufficient to enable the holder to maintain its 
 dignity. The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland must, like the 
 Lord Chancellor, be a non-Catholic. The full title of 
 the Chief Secretary is "Chief Secretary to the Lord 
 Lieutenant of Ireland. 11 The Chief Secretary was there- 
 fore originally subordinate to the Lord Lieutenant, but
 
 174 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 the relations between the two have become somewhat 
 inverted during the past fifteen years. Practically, the 
 Chief Secretary is now solely responsible for the Irish 
 Administration, and the Lord Lieutenant, as the repre- 
 sentative of the Crown, is not much more than an 
 ornamental and dignified figurehead. The seat in the 
 Cabinet naturally went to the Chief Secretary since the 
 rise of the office in importance. In the present 
 Administration, however, there has been a reversion to 
 the old order of things, so far at least as calling the 
 Lord Lieutenant and not the Chief Secretary within the 
 Cabinet is concerned. The Chief Secretary was also 
 formerly subordinate to the Home Secretary ; but he is 
 now independent of all control of the Home Office. He 
 is practically the Home Secretary, the Secretary to the 
 Local Government Board, the Secretary to the Board of 
 Works, and the Minister of Agriculture for Ireland. 
 
 Another office of dignity rather than of duty or re- 
 sponsibility, like the post of the Lord Privy Seal, is that 
 of the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. The duties 
 are purely nominal, and the holder of the office is 
 generally a man who is able to come to the assistance of 
 any member of the Administration when hard pressed 
 in Parliament. He may be in either House, and 
 generally has a seat in the Cabinet. He is paid =2000 
 per annum for his services. 
 
 Two of the busiest Ministers in the Administration 
 are the President of the Board of Trade and the 
 President of the Local Government Board, each of 
 whom receives ,2000 per annum, and as a rule they are 
 both members of the Cabinet. The former looks after 
 all commercial matters in the interest of the public. 
 He also supervises the working of railways, tramways,
 
 HER MAJESTY'S MINISTERS 175 
 
 canals, harbours, and the mercantile marine service. 
 The latter has charge of the public health, and controls 
 our local authorities. The Postmaster-General, who 
 manages the postal and telegraph services, receives 
 2500. He is not necessarily a Cabinet Minister. The 
 President of the Board of Agriculture, whose principal 
 duty is the prevention of diseases among our flocks and 
 herds ; the Vice- President of the Council for Education, 
 who controls the working of our great system of national 
 education ; and the First Commissioner of Works, who 
 has charge of the royal parks and pleasure-grounds, 
 Government Offices, and public buildings, are each paid 
 dPSOOO a year, and may or may not be in the Cabinet. 
 The Secretary for Scotland attends to matters relating 
 to Scotland he is practically the Home Secretary of 
 that country and receives 2000 a year. He is now 
 usually a member of the Cabinet. The Scottish law- 
 officers, or the legal advisers of the Government in 
 Scottish affairs, are the Lord Advocate, with a salary of 
 5000, and the Solicitor-General, with a salary of 
 
 The Attorney-General for England is paid a salary of 
 110,000 ; and the Solicitor-General, 9000 ; but both 
 receive in addition high fees for any cases they may con- 
 duct on behalf of the Crown in the law-courts. According 
 to a Parliamentary return published in 1895, the highest 
 sum paid in salaries and fees to the Attorney-General 
 for England in any year since 1880 was in 1893-94, 
 when the total reached 20,285, this being made up as 
 follows : Salary, =7000 ; fees and contentious business, 
 \ 2,635 ; clerks, =650. The lowest point reached 
 during the fifteen years was in 1889-90, when the total 
 was 9119. The highest remuneration received by the
 
 176 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Solicitor-General for England since 1880 was in 1888- 
 89, when 6000 was paid for salary and 5056 for 
 contentious business, total, 1 1,056, while in 1891-92 it 
 fell to dP7168. The English law-officers have recently 
 been debarred from accepting business except in the 
 service of the Crown, but as a solatium their salaries 
 were increased by ^3000, or from 1000 to =10,000 
 in the case of the Attorney-General, and from ,"6000 
 to 9000 in the case of the Solicitor-General. They 
 are the confidential advisers of the Government on legal 
 questions. Both also expound and defend the legal 
 portions of Government Bills in Committee of the 
 House of Commons. Neither is ever called within the 
 sacred circle of the Cabinet, owing to their connection 
 with the administration of the criminal law. When 
 they vacate office and become ex-law-officers of the 
 Crown, they require a special fee of fifty guineas before 
 appearing in any case in court. 
 
 Among the minor members of the Administration 
 are a Financial Secretary to the Treasury, who assists 
 the Chancellor of the Exchequer in revising and regu- 
 lating the expenditure of every department of the State, 
 and gets %000 per annum ; a Secretary to the Admiralty 
 at a salary of 2000 ; a Civil Lord of the; Admiralty 
 at a salary of ^1000, both of whom assist the First 
 Lord of the Admiralty in the work of his department ; 
 a Financial Secretary to the War Office, who draws 
 1500 a year, the same salary as is paid to each of the 
 Under-Secretaries to the five principal Secretaries of 
 State Home, Foreign, War, Indian, and Colonial ; and 
 there are Parliamentary Secretaries to the Board of 
 Trade, and the Local Government Board, who receive 
 ^1200 each.
 
 HER MAJESTY'S MINISTERS 177 
 
 Besides the task of appointing to the Ministerial 
 offices, the Prime Minister has the duty of filling up a 
 number of posts in the Royal Household, which like 
 those in the Administration are vacated on a change of 
 Government. The Master of the Horse is paid 2500 
 per annum ; and the Master of the Buckhounds, 1500. 
 The Lord Steward and the Lord Chamberlain are each 
 paid 2000 ; the Vice-Chamberlain, 924 ; the Comp- 
 troller of the Household and the Treasurer of the 
 Household, 904 each. There are also seven Lords-in- 
 Waiting, each of whom draws 102 per annum ; a 
 Parliamentary Groom-in- Waiting at 334 ; a Captain 
 of the Yeomen of the Guard and a Captain of the 
 Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms, each at ,1200; and a 
 Mistress of the Robes, generally a duchess, at ="500. 
 The duties attached to these offices are of a ceremonial 
 character, and are exceedingly light. The appoint- 
 ments enable the Government of the day to secure, 
 principally in the House of Lords, the services of men 
 who may be able to assist their party both in and out 
 of Parliament. 
 
 But it may be asked, has a Minister anything to look 
 forward to on retiring from office ? An ex-Lord Chan- 
 cellor of England receives 5000 a year ; but in consi- 
 deration of the pension continues to act as a Law Lord. 
 An ex-Lord Chancellor of Ireland gets 2692 6s. Id. ; 
 the penny, like the more substantial remainder of 
 the pension, being duly paid quarterly in farthings. 
 Four pensions of 2000 each may be granted to as 
 many ex-Ministers who, for not less than four years, 
 have been either one or other of the five principal 
 Secretaries of State, or First Lord of the Admiralty ; 
 and four more pensions of =1200 each may be granted 
 
 M
 
 178 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 to ex-Ministers who have filled for not less than six 
 years an office of less than ^5000, but not less than 
 ,2000 per annum. An applicant for one of these 
 pensions, which were created by the Political Offices 
 Pensions Act of 1869, must make a declaration that 
 it is necessary for his support. The benefits of the 
 Act have been taken advantage of by about ten ex- 
 Ministers. If the holder of one of these pensions for 
 "political and civil services 11 should be again appointed 
 to office with salary, he is not entitled to draw the 
 pension while he is in the Ministry. 
 
 A member of the House of Commons must resign 
 his seat and seek re-election on accepting office. The 
 only post exempt from the rule is the Secretaryship to 
 the Treasury. This custom was established by an 
 Act of the reign of Queen Anne. The object of 
 compelling a representative to submit his acceptance 
 of office to the judgment of his constituents was to 
 restrain the corrupt influence of the Crown over Parlia- 
 ment by its power of conferring places of profit on 
 servile and obsequious members. The danger the 
 statute was designed to avert is now happily past and 
 gone. The Sovereign is still, theoretically, " the source 
 of justice and of mercy ; of all offices, honours, emolu- 
 ments and chartered rights ; " and as such is supposed 
 to confer their offices on the members of the Admini- 
 tration, but in reality the appointments are solely made 
 by the Prime Minister. It is under him and not under 
 the Crown that Ministers hold office. The Act of Anne, 
 however, continues in operation despite the fact that the 
 complete revolution which has since occurred in our 
 political life has made it entirely remote from the 
 realities of the present time. Several unsuccessful
 
 HER MAJESTY'S MINISTERS 179 
 
 attempts have been made to repeal the statute. The 
 only modification of the original Act is that provided in 
 the Reform Act of 1867, by which a Minister who may 
 be removed from one office to another in the same Ad- 
 ministration need not seek re-election. 
 
 Sydney Smith once suggested that each Minister should 
 be provided with a " foolometer." " I mean, 1 " he explained 
 " the acquaintance and society of three or four regular 
 British fools as a test of public opinion. Every Cabinet 
 Minister should judge of all his measures by his foolo- 
 meter, as a navigator crowds or shortens sail by the 
 barometer in his cabin.' 11 Charles James Fox often used 
 to say, " I wonder what Lord B. will think of this ? " 
 As Lord B. happened to be a very stupid person, the 
 curiosity of the friends of Fox was naturally excited to 
 know why he should attach importance to the opinion of 
 so ordinary and commonplace a person. " His opinion,"" 
 explained Fox, " is of much more importance than you 
 are aware of. He is an exact representative of all the 
 commonplace English prejudices, and what Lord B. 
 thinks of any measure the English people will think 
 of it." 
 
 But the establishment of the penny post has brought 
 every Minister into contact with all the fools of Great 
 Britain and a good many outside the kingdom also. 
 Piles of correspondence face him every morning on 
 his breakfast-table at his private residence, again on 
 his desk in his room at Whitehall towards noon, and 
 for a third time during the afternoon when he appears 
 in the House of Commons. The more prominent he is 
 in Parliament, and, therefore, the more responsible the 
 duties of his office, the greater is the legion of his tor- 
 mentors through the post.
 
 180 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Of course the officials in the various Government 
 departments at Whitehall do their best to lighten the 
 labours of their chiefs. When the correspondence not 
 marked " Private and confidential " has been read, the 
 bulk of the letters, after the receipt of each is formally 
 acknowledged, is carted away and ruthlessly destroyed. 
 But there is left a large number of letters requiring the 
 personal attention of the Minister. To each of these a 
 piece of coloured paper is affixed to denote its degree of 
 urgency. If red, the matter will wait ; if yellow, it is to 
 be dealt with as soon as possible ; if green, it is urgent 
 and of vital importance. "Private and confidential" 
 hasj of course, to be respected by the officials. Letters 
 so marked are left to be dealt with solely by the 
 Minister; but the vast majority of them might have 
 been flung worthless as they are with the bulk of the 
 opened letters in the waste-paper basket. 
 
 The contents of a Ministerial post-bag are certainly 
 varied. Some of the letters are of a threatening char- 
 acter ; others contain recipes for curing complaints and 
 prolonging life. In 1887, during the late Conservative 
 Administration, a dynamitard wrote to the Prime 
 Minister that he and Mr. W. H. Smith, the First Lord 
 of the Treasury, were specially marked for destruction. 
 Lord Salisbury forwarded the interesting missive to his 
 colleague, with the following note : 
 
 MY DEAR SMITH, The enclosed may interest you. In 
 point of superficies, I fear I'm the bigger mark of the 
 two. 
 
 On the other hand, during an indisposition from 
 which Lord Rosebery suffered while Prime Minister, no 
 fewer than one hundred cures for insomnia were sent to
 
 HER MAJESTY'S MINISTERS 181 
 
 Downing Street, all warranted to lull the sleepless 
 statesman to rest. 
 
 Warnings of impending ruin to the Empire ; offers 
 of services to avert otherwise inevitable national dis- 
 asters ; schemes for the regeneration of society are also 
 plentiful in the shoals of letters which reach Ministers 
 daily at Whitehall and Westminster. Again and again 
 have succeeding Foreign Secretaries been warned of a 
 secret coalition having been formed by the Great 
 Continental Powers to destroy the prestige of England, 
 the warning being in each case accompanied by a 
 patriotic offer on the part of the writer to betake 
 himself to Paris and to St. Petersburg, to worm out 
 the machinations of France and Russia, provided 
 he was equipped with a modest purse of 5000 a 
 year. 
 
 Lord Selbome, Under-Secretary for the Colonies in 
 the present Administration, stated that during the 
 Transvaal crisis, in the beginning of 1896, the Colonial 
 Office received twenty letters a day, half the writers 
 urging the Government to send 60,000 men to the 
 Transvaal at once, and " crush Kriiger, 11 while the other 
 half declared : " For goodness' sake leave Mr. Kriiger 
 alone. 11 
 
 About 40,000 schemes for paying off the National 
 Debt have been received at the Treasury during the 
 last forty years. Premiers have been pestered with 
 innumerable plans for federating the Empire. The 
 Budget is prepared every year by at least twenty 
 amateur financiers from as many different standpoints, 
 and sent cut-and-dry to the happy Chancellor of the 
 Exchequer. The chief of the Treasury is thus saved 
 half the labour of his arduous post. All he has to
 
 182 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 do is to select one Budget from the heap, and read it as 
 his own to a House of Commons spellbound by his 
 genius as a financier. 
 
 But these people who are so eager to transfer to 
 their own shoulders some of the heaviest responsibilities 
 of our statesmen, and who apparently give all their 
 time to thinking out schemes for the glory and material 
 prosperity of the Empire, do not confine themselves 
 to the facilities of the post in order to communicate 
 with Ministers. They call in their thousands at 
 the various State Departments, and solicit or de- 
 mand personal interviews. The man with a genius 
 for inventing extraordinary mechanical contrivances 
 for all sorts of purposes is a familiar figure in the 
 halls and corridors and lobbies of Whitehall and 
 Westminster. 
 
 One day an inventor found his way into the private 
 room of the Secretary of State for War, to explain a 
 new contrivance which would destroy any army against 
 which it was directed. 
 
 "It is the most powerful explosive the world ever 
 saw,"" said the visitor, "and I propose to send up a 
 balloon over an army that would attack ours, setting 
 the fuse so that it would go off the moment the balloon 
 floated over the army of the enemy." 
 
 "That is all very good, indeed, 11 said the Secretary 
 for War, interrupting ; " but suppose that a current of 
 air should carry your explosive balloon over our army 
 what then?" 
 
 "Well, 11 said the inventor, laying his hand on the 
 right hon. gentleman's arm ; " I tell you what it is, my 
 friend our army would have to gei up and run like 
 the very Dickens ! "
 
 HEU MAJESTY'S MINISTERS 183 
 
 Perhaps it was these experiences that inspired Lord 
 liosebery's famous saying : " There are two supreme 
 political pleasures in life. One is ideal, the other real. 
 The ideal is when a man receives the seals of office from 
 the hands of his Sovereign; the real when he hands 
 them back."
 
 184 
 
 CHAPTER X 
 "THE QUEEN'S SPEECH" 
 
 " THE Queen's Speech, 11 which is read to both Houses of 
 Parliament at the opening of every Session, and in which 
 the legislative programme the Government contemplates 
 for the Session is usually foreshadowed, is one of the 
 many survivals of the historic past that touch the 
 imagination archaic and anomalous though they may 
 now appear in some respects and lend an antique charm 
 to the making of our laws at Westminster. To call the 
 speech " the Queen's Speech " is a polite fiction ; ay, 
 though the Lord Chancellor, before he reads it in the 
 House of Lords is careful to say, following an im- 
 memorial custom with whose veracity time has played 
 sad havoc, that it is " in her Majesty's own words." 
 The Sovereign has little or nothing- to do with its 
 composition. It is really the speech of the Cabinet. 
 But though in these days of constitutional Monarchy 
 " the Speech from the Throne " (to give it its proper 
 Parliamentary designation) is a mere ceremonial function, 
 it was a potent reality that not infrequently spelt 
 injustice and oppression to the subject, in times when 
 the Sovereign was the absolute ruler of the land. 
 Parliament could not meet in those far-off days unless 
 summoned by the Sovereign. When Parliament did 
 meet the Sovereign in his " Speech from the Throne " in
 
 "THE QUEEN'S SPEECH" 185 
 
 the House of Lords, laid down the business it had to 
 discharge, and Parliament had to confine itself to the 
 work thus allotted to it at the royal pleasure. 
 
 This prerogative is still theoretically vested in the 
 Crown. Parliament can only be summoned by the 
 Sovereign; but practically, since the Revolution, the 
 Sovereign acts in the matter solely on the advice of the 
 Ministers. Again, Parliament cannot proceed with any 
 business until the speech of the Sovereign, stating the 
 causes of summons has been delivered ; but since the 
 Revolution also, neither House is bound to consider 
 only the matters mentioned in the speech. 
 
 The first draft of the speech is written by the Prime 
 Minister. It is laid before the Cabinet for consideration, 
 where perhaps it undergoes some alteration and 
 emendation, and finally it is formally endorsed by the 
 signature of the Sovereign at a meeting in Council, 
 consisting of members of the Cabinet, called specially 
 for the purpose. On two occasions since the Revolution 
 Parliament has been opened with a speech which 
 had not received the signature of the Sovereign 
 in 1789 and 1810, during the reign of George III., 
 when, owing to illness, the King was incapable of 
 exercising his constitutional functions. On both 
 occasions the " causes of summons "" were declared in 
 virtue of a commission to which the Great Seal was 
 attached by the Lord Chancellor, as the Lord Keeper 
 of the Great Seal, without, of course, the authority of 
 the Sovereign. The highest legal authorities of the day, 
 and since, have held that this course was rendered 
 strictly constitutional by the endorsement of the Great 
 Seal, the emblem of sovereignty, which, with the pre- 
 rogatives attached to it, are, they argued, handed
 
 186 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 over to every Lord Chancellor on his appointment to 
 office. 
 
 The speech is usually a commonplace document, and 
 written as it is, in a prescribed form, it invariably bears 
 a remarkable resemblance to its predecessors. It is 
 always divided into three sections. The first section, 
 addressed to " My Lords and Gentlemen," deals with the 
 foreign affairs of the Empire ; then there is a brief 
 paragraph with regard to the estimates, specially 
 addressed to " Gentlemen of the House of Commons," 
 as the sole custodians and guardians of the public 
 purse; and the third section, which also opens with 
 " My Lords and Gentlemen, 11 contains some general 
 remarks on home affairs, such as the condition of trade ; 
 notices briefly any important facts in current foreign 
 politics, or in the domestic annals of the Royal Family, 
 and shadows forth the legislative programme of the 
 Session. There is usually a concluding invocation of 
 " the blessing and guidance of Almighty God " upon the 
 labours which Parliament is about to undertake. 
 
 " Well, Lord Chancellor, 11 said George III. to Lord 
 Eldon, on one occasion, as he was going out of the 
 House of Lords, after opening Parliament, "did I 
 deliver the speech well ? "" " Very well indeed, Sir, 11 
 was the reply. " I 1 m surprised at that " said the King, 
 "for there was nothing in it. 11 His Majesty put "a very 
 good thing 11 into the first speech he ever read from the 
 Throne. He was the first English-born King since the 
 Revolution. There was consequently much popular 
 rejoicing when he succeeded to the Crown in 1760. 
 " We have now (praise be to God for it) a truly patriot 
 King ! " was the sentiment of the day. He was to 
 open his first Parliament in November 1760, and in
 
 "THE QUEEN'S SPEECH" 18? 
 
 due course his Ministers submitted to him the draft of 
 the speech. He then inserted in the speech with his 
 own hand the happy sentence : " Born and educated in 
 this country, I glory in the name of Briton." It in- 
 creased his popularity immensely. Another anecdote, 
 also from the reign of George III., will show that the 
 Sovereign has nothing to do with the composition of 
 the speech, beyond formally affixing his signature to it. 
 In 1770 the speech contained an allusion to an act of 
 oppression by a Spanish officer in the Falkland Islands, 
 which had aroused popular indignation, and said, 
 contrary to the fact, that the Spanish Government had 
 disowned the conduct of its officer. " There never was 
 a more odious, a more infamous falsehood, imposed on 
 a great nation," said Lord Chatham, in the course of a 
 vehement attack on the Speech from the Throne for this 
 comment on the incident. " It degrades the King ; it 
 insults the Parliament. His Majesty has been advised 
 to affirm an absolute falsehood."" 
 
 There is a popular tradition that "the Queen's 
 Speeches " are about the worst models of " the Queen's 
 English v to be found in our language. But that 
 criticism is rather too sweeping in its condemnation. 
 A perusal of the speeches which have been delivered in 
 Parliament in the name of the Queen will show that 
 while some are feeble, pointless and ungrammatical, 
 many are couched in the most graphic, terse, and 
 forcible language. In the first category are most of the 
 speeches written by Lord Melbourne, and a few by 
 Lord John Russell ; and in the latter class are almost 
 all of those of Lord Derby, Lord Palmerston, Lord 
 Beacoiisfield, Mr. Gladstone, and Lord Salisbury. 
 Lord Beaconsfiekr* " Queen's Speeches " are, as a rule,
 
 188 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 ornate in style. In one there is a picture of "the 
 elephants of Asia carrying the artillery of Europe over 
 the mountains of Rasselas " ; and another, referring to 
 the founding of British Columbia, contains this "purple 
 patch " : 
 
 Her Majesty hopes that this new colony in the Pacific 
 may be but one step in a career of steady progress, by 
 which her Majesty's dominions in North America may 
 ultimately be peopled by an unbroken chain, from the 
 Atlantic to the Pacific, of a loyal and industrious population 
 of subjects of the British Crown. 
 
 The Queen, has not often, during her long reign, 
 opened Parliament in person. It has usually been done, 
 especially in later years, by Commission. The first 
 Parliament of the Queen was opened on November 20, 
 1839, by her Majesty in person. The scene on that 
 historic occasion in the old House of Lords was most 
 brilliant. Ladics-in-waiting were grouped behind the 
 young Queen, bearing up her long train. Her mother, 
 the Duchess of Kent, stood by her side to the right, 
 and a little to the rear; on her left were Viscount 
 Melbourne, and other Ministers. The benches were 
 crowded with peers and peeresses amongst whom 
 Wellington, Brougham, Lyndhurst, were distinguished 
 figures in robes and Court dresses. Below the Bar 
 were assembled the Commons, with the Speaker (James 
 Abercromby) at their head, and in the throng might 
 have been seen such eminent statesmen and giants of the 
 Lower House as Lord John Russell, Sir Robert Peel, 
 Lord Palmerston, Daniel O'Connell, Robert Stanley, 
 and two young members Gladstone, who had been 
 four years in Parliament, and had held office in the late
 
 "THE QUEEN'S SPEECH" 189 
 
 Tory Government; and Disraeli, who had just been 
 returned, at the General Election, for Maidstone, and 
 who in a few weeks (on December 7 following), was to 
 make his famous maiden speech, which the House punc- 
 tuated with ironical laughter, but which concluded with 
 the prophetic declaration: "Though I sit down now, 
 the time will come when you will hear me."" Writing 
 to his sister, on November 21, 1837, Disraeli thus de- 
 scribes the rush of the Commons to the House of 
 Lords, and the brilliant scene in that Chamber on the 
 previous day : 
 
 The rush was terrific ; Abercromby himself nearly thrown 
 down and trampled upon, and his mace-bearer banging the 
 members' heads with his gorgeous weapon and cracking 
 skulls with impunity. I am fortunate enough to escape, 
 however, and also to ensure an entry. It was a magnifi- 
 cent spectacle. The Queen looked admirable ; no feathers, 
 but a diamond tiara. The peers in robes, the peeresses 
 and the sumptuous groups of courtiers rendered the affair 
 most glittering and imposing. 
 
 " The Speech from the Throne," which was written by 
 the Prime Minister, Lord Melbourne, and read by her 
 Majesty, was for the first time transmitted to the chief 
 towns of the kingdom by the electric telegraph. It 
 concluded with these words : 
 
 The early age at which I am called to the sovereignty 
 of this kingdom renders it a more imperative duty that 
 under divine Providence I should place my reliance upon 
 your cordial co-operation, and upon the loyal affection of 
 all my people. 
 
 "The Queen's voice was excellent," wrote Mrs. 
 Kemble, the famous actress, who was present; "nor
 
 190 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 have I ever heard any spoken words more musical in 
 their gentle distinctness than the ' my lords and gentle- 
 men 1 which broke the breathless silence of the illus- 
 trious assembly, whose gaze was riveted upon that fair 
 flower of royalty. 11 
 
 A year earlier Parliament was opened by William IN", 
 for the last time. What a contrast between that 
 pathetic scene and this splendid and joyful ceremony ! 
 The aged King, wrapped in his ample white ermine 
 robes, and his grey locks surmounted by the Imperial 
 crown, stood on the Throne in the House of Lords, 
 with the shadows of evening thickening in the Chamber, 
 struggling, with his impaired vision and the defective 
 light, to read the speech which had been prepared for 
 him by Lord Melbourne. He stammered slowly, and 
 almost inaudibly, through the first few sentences of the 
 manuscript, pausing now and then over a difficult word, 
 which was too much for him, and turning to the Prime 
 Minister with the query, " What is it, Melbourne ? " 
 At last, losing all patience, he angrily exclaimed, in 
 that full-blooded language of which he was so fond : 
 " Damn it, I can't see ! " A number of wax tapers 
 were brought in, and placed close to the aged king. 
 " My lords and gentlemen, 11 said he then, " I have hitherto 
 not been able, for want of light, to read this speech in 
 a way its importance deserves ; but as lights are now 
 brought me, I will read it again from the commence- 
 ment, and in a way which, I trust, will command your 
 attention." And read it he did in as strong and clear 
 a voice as he could command, with a pathetic desire to 
 show to the assembled Peers and Commons that his 
 mental and physical powers were by no means failing 
 him.
 
 "THE QUEEN'S SPEECH" 19! 
 
 It was at the opening of the third Session of the first 
 Parliament of the Queen, on January 16, 1840, Lord 
 Melbourne being still Premier, that her Majesty read 
 from her speech the announcement of her approaching 
 marriage in the following words : 
 
 My Lords and Gentlemen, Since you were last assembled 
 I have declared my intention of allying myself in marriage 
 with Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. I humbly 
 implore that the divine blessing may prosper this union, 
 and render it conducive to the interests of my people, as 
 well as to my own domestic happiness ; and it will be to 
 me a source of the most lively satisfaction to find the reso- 
 lution I have taken approved by my Parliament. The 
 constant proofs which I have received of your attachment 
 to my person and family persuade me that you will enable 
 me to provide for such an establishment as may appear 
 suitable to the rank of the Prince and the dignity of the 
 Crown. 
 
 The royal marriage was solemnised that day 
 month, February 16, 1840, and on the next occasion 
 her Majesty opened Parliament, February 3, 1842, 
 Sir Robert Peel being Prime Minister, she announced 
 in the speech another most joyful event in her domestic 
 life the birth of the Prince of Wales which took 
 place on November 9, 1841. The speech said : 
 
 My Lords and Gentlemen, I cannot meet you in Par- 
 liament assembled without making a public acknowledg- 
 ment of my gratitude to Almighty God, on account of the 
 birth of the Prince, my son an event which has completed 
 the measure of my domestic happiness, and has been hailed 
 with every demonstration of affectionate attachment to my 
 person and government by my faithful and loyal people.
 
 192 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 The Prince Consort died on December 14, 1861. At 
 the opening, by Commission, of the fourth Session of 
 her Majesty's sixth Parliament, Lord Palmerston being 
 Premier, this great domestic affliction of the Sovereign 
 was thus announced in " the Queen's Speech : " 
 
 My Lords and Gentlemen, We are commanded by her 
 Majesty to assure you that her Majesty is persuaded that 
 you will deeply participate in the affliction by which her 
 Majesty has been overwhelmed by the calamitous, untimely 
 and irreparable loss of her beloved Consort, who has been 
 her comfort and support. It has been, however, soothing 
 to her Majesty, while suffering most acutely under this 
 awful dispensation of Providence, to receive from all classes 
 of her subjects the most cordial assurances of their sym- 
 pathy with her sorrow, as well as their appreciation of the 
 noble character of him, the greatness of whose loss to her 
 Majesty and to the nation is so justly and so universally 
 felt and lamented. 
 
 On the occasions, few and far between, that her 
 Majesty has opened Parliament in person since the 
 death of the Prince Consort, the speech has been read, 
 at her command, by the Lord Chancellor. 
 
 Until 1870 the speech was, in the Queen's absence, 
 always written in the third person. It commenced 
 with the formula "We have her Majesty's commands 
 to declare that her Majesty," &c. But Mr. Gladstone, 
 in the year mentioned, wrote the speech in the first 
 person, with a liberal use of the pronoun " I," and since 
 then that example has been invariably followed by all 
 Prime Ministers. 
 
 Such, then, is the origin, the purport, and the mean- 
 ing of " the Speech from the Throne," which is read in
 
 THE QUEEN'S SPEECH" 193 
 
 
 the House of Lords to both Houses, after the members 
 
 returned to serve in a new Parliament have been sworn 
 in, or on the first day of an ordinary Session. 
 
 Parliament is summoned for a Session in the name of 
 the Sovereign, but really by the Cabinet. A proclama- 
 tion, signed by the Queen, is published in the London 
 Gazette the official organ of the Government calling 
 together, on a certain date mentioned, the lords 
 spiritual and temporal, and the representatives of the 
 people, for the transaction of divers urgent and im- 
 portant business. Tuesday or Thursday is usually 
 chosen for the assembling of Parliament, as meeting on 
 Monday would involve the members' 1 travelling on 
 Sunday, and as the sitting on Wednesday is short and 
 usually devoted to private members. Two o'clock is 
 always the hour fixed for the opening ceremony. In 
 the morning, the cellars beneath the Palace of West- 
 minster are searched by the Yeomen of the Guard, 
 whether it be the first day of a new Parliament, or the 
 first day of an ordinary Session. 
 
 As two o'clock approaches, the Chamber becomes 
 crowded with members. They form groups, irrespec- 
 tive of party, chatting, joking, and laughing, relating 
 their experiences during the recess, or discussing the 
 political prospects of the Session. Suddenly the ani- 
 mated buzz of conversation in the Chamber is stilled by 
 cries of " Way for the Speaker ! Way for the 
 Speaker ! '" which resound in stentorian tones through 
 the lobbies outside ; and the cry is followed by a rush 
 of members to their places. The benches on each sidi- 
 are now thronged, and members respectfully stand Un- 
 covered to receive the Speaker. 
 
 Arrayed now in his full attire the flowing silk
 
 194 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMFA'T 
 
 gown, knee-breeches, silk stockings, shoes with silver 
 buckles ; on his head the huge wig, with wings that fall 
 down at each side over his shoulders, and carrying his 
 three-cornered hat in his right hand the Speaker, 
 attended by his Chaplain in a Geneva gown, and the 
 Serjeant-at-Arms, in court or levee dress, a sword by 
 his side, and carrying the huge bronze mace on his 
 right shoulder, walks slowly up the floor of the 
 Chamber, and as he approaches the Chair, he makes it 
 three low obeisances. 
 
 Prayers for " light and leading " are recited by the 
 Chaplain, after which the members, in single file, pass 
 the Chair and shake hands with the Speaker. Then 
 comes " Black Hod " to summon the Commons to the 
 Upper Chamber. The Speaker slowly leaves the Chair it 
 would be a breach of the best traditions of his office for 
 a Speaker to show any sign of haste and attended by 
 the Serjeant-at-Arms, bearing the mace on his shoulder, 
 and accompanied by the members in a mass behind, 
 follows "Black Rod" out through the lobbies to the 
 Bar of the House of Lords, to hear "the Queen's Speech" 
 read. When the Sovereign opens Parliament in person, 
 so keen is the desire of the Commons to witness the 
 ceremony, that they hustle and jostle and shoulder each 
 other, and press closely on the heels of the Speaker, in 
 their eagerness to secure good places in the very limited 
 space allotted to them in the House of Lords. At the 
 opening of Parliament by the Queen in 1851, Mr. Joseph 
 Hume complained in the House of Commons that he 
 had been very roughly treated in the Upper Chamber 
 during the ceremony. "I neither saw the Queen nor 
 heard her voice," said he, plaintively. " I was crushed 
 into a corner ; my head was knocked against a post, and
 
 "THE QUEEN'S SPEECH" 195 
 
 I might have been much injured if a stout member, 
 to whom I am much obliged, had not come to my 
 assistance." On another occasion a member had his 
 coat torn and his shoulder dislocated during the rush. 
 In 1866, the gown of the Speaker was trodden upon 
 and torn off* his back. In 1875 Disraeli, then Prime 
 Minister, was thrown down in the rush and narrowly 
 escaped injury. On being raised, he quietly said : 
 " This shall not occur again ! " He was Lord Beacons- 
 field at the opening of the following Session, and in 
 the same ceremony earned the Sword of State imme- 
 diately before the Queen, as she walked into the House 
 of Lords. 
 
 " What a pity that these thoughtful boys should 
 ever become frivolous members of Parliament," ex- 
 claimed Sydney Smith during a visit to Eton or Harrow. 
 One is reminded of the saying of the \vit by these 
 occasional scrimmages amongst members of the House 
 of Commons as they rush to the House of Lords 
 to hear " the Speech from the Throne." It is like the 
 scramble for places in the pit and gallery of a popular 
 theatre on a first-night performance. A crowd of 
 schoolboys is not more noisy, or less dignified, than 
 our representatives as they troop across the lobbies, 
 pushing and shoving and jostling until the Speaker is 
 often forced by the press behind to change his slow and 
 measured pace into an undignified trot. 
 
 Arrived at the door of the House of Lords, the 
 Serj can t-at- Arms leaves the mace in charge of one of 
 the group of messengers all in knee-breeches and 
 swallow-tailed coats who attend the Speaker from the 
 House of Commons. The mace is not allowed to be 
 brought into the Chamber of the Lords. Here we
 
 196 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 have another instance of the jealousy of each Chamber 
 in guarding its rights and privileges. As the Commons 
 do not admit " Black Rod " to their presence until he 
 first humbly asks permission, so the Lords will not 
 permit the mace the emblem of the power and 
 authority of the Commons to affront their sight 
 within the walls of their own Chamber. The Serjeant- 
 at-Arms must therefore leave the mace with one of his 
 attendants at the door of the House of Lords. Enter- 
 ing the Chamber, the Speaker stands at the Bar, with 
 " Black Rod " on his right, the Serjeant-at-Arms on 
 his left, while the members squeeze into the enclosed 
 pen behind, or crowd into two small remote galleries 
 which flank the Press and strangers' 1 galleries just over 
 the Bar. The space in the Upper House at the disposal 
 of the Commons is not sufficient to accommodate a sixth 
 of their numbers, and hence the great rush to secure a 
 good place and a point of vantage. 
 
 On the rare occasions the Sovereign is present, the 
 spectacle in the House of Lords is full of colour 
 and ablaze with jewels. The Queen sits on the Throne, 
 a magnificent chair, richly carved, studded with crystals 
 emblazoned with the royal arms and other heraldic 
 devices in gold, and raised on a crimson dais at the end 
 of the Chamber. She wears a miniature of the Imperial 
 crown over her white widow^s cap, from which long 
 white streamers depend at each side. The robe of state, 
 a long, sweeping, ermine cloak, is thrown loosely over 
 her shoulders, so as not to hide the broad blue ribbon 
 and the star of the Order of the Garter, which she 
 displays over her customary black dress, her splendid 
 necklace of diamonds, and the flashing Koh-i-noor on 
 her breast.
 
 "THE QUEEN'S SPEECH" 197 
 
 The 1'rince of Wales, in his crimson robes as a peer of 
 the Blood Royal, sits on a chair to the right of the 
 Throne, while grouped around are the officers of state, 
 the Earl Marshal, the Lord Chamberlain, the Garter- 
 King-at-Anns, in scarlet and gold. To the left of the 
 Throne a vacant chair may be noticed. It is the chair 
 the Prince Consort used to occupy at the opening of Par- 
 liament by the Queen. The crimson benches are crowded 
 with the peers in their scarlet robes, with the bishops 
 in their black, flowing gowns and lawn sleeves of liberal 
 amplitude ; and the galleries around are bright with the 
 fair faces, the variegated dresses, the diamonds and 
 flowers of peeresses and other ladies of high degree. 
 This brilliant picture is magnificently framed by the 
 brown oak panelling of the Chamber, the stained glass 
 windows with their effigies of departed kings and queens, 
 the statues of the armour-clad barons of Magna Charta, 
 everything appealing to history, tradition, sentiment, 
 imagination, and reverence, and the whole forming a 
 most stately and impressive spectacle. 
 
 When Parliament is opened by Royal Commission, 
 as it now invariably is, the ceremony, though naturally 
 shorn of much of its splendour by the absence of the 
 Sovereign, is not the less interesting and attractive 
 from the historical point of view. On such an occasion, 
 as I have already described in a preceding chapter, the 
 most conspicuous figures in the ceremony are five 
 personages sitting in a row on a bench beneath the 
 Throne, wearing scarlet robes trimmed with white 
 fur, and black three-cornered hats. They are the Lord 
 High Commissioners the centre figure being the Lord 
 Chancellor who are appointed by the Queen to act on 
 her behalf.
 
 198 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 The Lord Chancellor announces to the members of 
 both Houses whether the occasion be the assembling of 
 a new Parliament or the opening of a Session that her 
 Majesty, " not thinking it fit to be personally present," 
 has been pleased to cause a Commission to be issued 
 under the Great Seal, "in order to the opening and 
 controlling of this Parliament. 1 " The Royal Com- 
 mission is then read by the Reading Clerk, one of the 
 three clerks robed in gowns and w igs (like the Clerks 
 of the House of Commons), who sit at the table ; after 
 which the Lord Chancellor, still retaining his seat, and 
 his head still covered by his quaint black hat, reads " the 
 Speech from the Throne "" in " the Queen's own words." 
 This ends for the present the proceedings in the House 
 of Lords. 
 
 Not a word is said by the Speaker during the cere- 
 mony. When all is over he bows to the Lords Com- 
 missioners which they acknowledge by raising their 
 hats and then retires to the Lower House, attended by 
 the Serjeant-at-Arms, who again carries the mace; but 
 instead of taking the Chair, he disappears behind it, 
 and retires to his residence. The Serjeant-at-Arms 
 leaves the mace upon the table, to indicate that there 
 is but a suspension of the sitting and not an adjourn- 
 ment of the House. At four o'clock the Lords and the 
 Commons re-assemble in their respective Chambers. 
 ' The Queen's Speech v is again read in both Houses 
 in the Lords by the Lord Chancellor, in the Commons 
 by the Speaker. But before this happens it is the 
 practice of each House to carry the reading of some 
 Bill, pro forma. The incident escapes the notice of 
 most members of the respective Houses, it passes so 
 quietly, and those who .see it do not, perhaps, grasp
 
 "THE QUEEN'S SPEECH" 199 
 
 its significance. Yet it is of high constitutional 
 import, notwithstanding its unostentatious character. 
 The Clerk in each House simply rises and reads the 
 title of some Government Bill ; the Speaker or the Lord 
 Chancellor at once puts the question that it be read a 
 first time, and declares it carried. The practice is 
 meant to assert the privilege of Parliament to debate 
 matters other than those set forth as " the causes of 
 summons " in the Speech from the Throne. 
 
 The House of Commons is once more crowded with 
 members. All of them, probably, accompanied the 
 Speaker two hours previously to the House of Lords to 
 hear "the Queen's Speech."" But, nevertheless, the 
 Speaker gravely informs them that "this House has 
 been to the House of Peers " to hear the gracious " Speech 
 from the Throne " ; and having, as he says, " for greater 
 accuracy," procured a copy of that speech, he proceeds 
 to read it with solemn, emphatic emphasis to the 
 House, which already knows its purport. The speech, 
 it should be mentioned, is printed as a Parliamentary 
 paper. It is one of the polite customs of Parliament 
 for the chief leaders of the Opposition to receive copies 
 of the speech the night before it is delivered, in order 
 that they may have the opportunity of privately 
 considering it before the time comes for public criticism 
 of it in the House. Then, when it is read to both Houses 
 by the Lord Chancellor, copies are given to representa- 
 tives of the Press, so that it appears in every evening 
 newspaper in London and the provinces long before the 
 Houses, when they assemble again at four o'clock, hear 
 it read for the second time. 
 
 In each House a motion for an Address to her 
 Majesty for her "most gracious speech"" is then sub-
 
 200 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 initted on behalf of the Government. It is the custom 
 for the proposer and seconder of the Address in each 
 House to attend in their places in uniform or full 
 dress. The uniforms of the Militia or Yeomanry are 
 much affected on such occasions, but if the necessary 
 commission in either of these branches of the service is 
 not held by the proposer or seconder, court costume or 
 levee dress is worn ; and the rule which prohibits a 
 member of either House to enter it wearing a sword is 
 suspended for the occasion. There is, however, on 
 record one instance of the Address having been seconded 
 by a member who wore neither a civil nor military 
 uniform. Mr. Charles Fenwick, the labour member, 
 when he seconded the motion for the Address at 
 the opening of the first Session of the Liberal Parlia- 
 ment of 1893-95, wore ordinary attire. 
 
 It is considered a flattering compliment to be invited 
 to move or second the motion for the Address in reply to 
 " the Queen's Speech." Two young members of promise 
 belonging to the party in office are generally selected for 
 the distinction ; and, as a rule, one represents an urban 
 constituency and the other a rural one one is connected 
 with land and the other with trade. And yet the 
 occasion affords little scope for a fine oratorical effort. 
 The speeches are usually mere echoes of the Queen's 
 Speech, commonplace commendations of its references to 
 foreign affairs and its promises of domestic legislation, 
 and are rarely marked by independence of thought or 
 originality of expression. But the debate which fol- 
 lows is of serious import. The Opposition give battle 
 to the Ministerialists. The policy of the Government is 
 attacked all along the line in a series of amendments to 
 the Address, and frequently for a full fortnight the
 
 "THE QUEEN'S SPEECH" 201 
 
 jangle of party controversy is heard in the House of 
 Commons. 
 
 Formerly the Address was a very elaborate document, 
 which gave thanks to her Majesty for each and every 
 paragraph in the speech. But in recent years it has 
 assumed a more simple and rational form, as follows : 
 
 That an humble Address be presented to her Majesty, 
 as followeth : 
 
 Most gracious Sovereign, We, your Majesty's most 
 dutiful and loyal subjects, the Commons of the United 
 Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in Parliament as- 
 sembled, beg leave to thank your Majesty for the most 
 gracious speech which your Majesty has addressed to both 
 Houses of Parliament. 
 
 When " the Speech from the Throne " was read by the 
 Queen to the assembled Houses of Parliament, or by 
 the Lord Chancellor at her command and in her 
 presence, the Addresses in reply from the Lords and the 
 Commons were formerly presented to her Majesty at 
 Buckingham Palace or at Windsor Palace, nominally by 
 " the whole House " in each case, but really by the Lord 
 Chancellor for the Lords and the Speaker for the 
 Commons, each being attended by the proposer and 
 seconder and a few select members of either House. All 
 the members of each House have, however, free entry to 
 the royal presence on such occasions. 
 
 But the course which has been followed in recent 
 years is that the Addresses are presented by two officers 
 of the Royal Household who are members of the 
 Administration, and, of course, members of the House 
 of Lords or the House of Commons. These officers 
 also bring back to both Houses the Queen's acknow-
 
 202 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 ledgment of the Addresses. A message from the Throne, 
 or, as it is called, "a message under the royal sign- 
 manual,"" is presented to both Houses with some 
 ceremony. In the Lords, the Lord Steward of the 
 Household, in full levee costume and bearing a white 
 staff* in his left hand, rises in his place at an opportune 
 moment and announces that he has a message under 
 the royal sign-manual which her Majesty had com- 
 manded him to deliver to their lordships. He then 
 presents it to the Lord Chancellor, who reads it to 
 the House. In the Commons the incident is a 
 little more picturesque. It comes off' in the usually 
 idle half-hour that intervenes between prayers and 
 questions. The Comptroller of the Household, who 
 bears the message from the Throne, appears at the Bar 
 unannounced. Unlike the incursions of " Black Hod," 
 from the House of Lords, who is always announced by 
 the ear-splitting whoop of the doorkeeper and enters 
 the Chamber amid wild alarums, the messenger from 
 the Throne has free entry to the House ; he comes in 
 without fuss or noise, and, his duty discharged, is 
 allowed to depart in peace. Standing at the Bar, in his 
 dark uniform, relieved by a liberal display of golden 
 braid and gilt buttons, his three-cornered hat under his 
 left arm, a white wand in his left hand, and the royal 
 message, engrossed on parchment, in his right, he 
 announces to the Speaker, who stands as the 
 message from the Throne is being delivered, while the 
 members respectfully uncover, that he bears from her 
 Majesty her most grateful thanks for the Address from 
 her faithful Commons. Then, advancing to the table, 
 he hands the message to the Clerk, who . passes it on to 
 the Speaker, by whom it is read to the House.
 
 "THE QUEEN'S SPEECH" 203 
 
 After this the Comptroller of the Household retires 
 clown the floor, stepping backwards, facing the Chair 
 and bowing at intervals, until the Bar is reached again, 
 when, turning round, he disappears through the swing- 
 doors. But this occurs at least a week after the 
 Address has been adopted, and the work of Parliament 
 has begun in real earnest.
 
 204 
 
 CHAPTER XI 
 THE SERJEANT-AT-ARMS 
 
 A CONSPICUOUS object in the House of Commons is a 
 large armchair of heavy oak, upholstered in dark green 
 leather, raised about two feet above the level of the 
 floor, and standing at the Bar, just inside the swing- 
 doors which form the main entrance to the legislative 
 Chamber. This is the chair of the Serjeant-at-Arms, 
 the chief executive officer of the House of Commons, 
 who is charged with the important duties of preserving 
 order and decorum in the Chamber and its precincts, 
 and of executing the warrants of the House against 
 persons it has adjudged guilty of breaches of its privi- 
 leges or contempt of its dignity. 
 
 The Serjeant-at-Arms is therefore a high official of 
 the House of Commons. During the proceedings of the 
 House he sits in his chair facing the Speaker, clad in a 
 tight-fitting cut-away coat of sober black, open at the 
 breast to show the daintiest of ruffles in the whitest of 
 cambric (of which the fops in the times of the Georges 
 were so fond) ; knee-breeches of the same material as 
 the coat ; black silk stockings, and shoes with silver 
 buckles, and, as the symbol of the power and authority 
 of his office, a sword in its scabbard is girt to his side. 
 His voice is never heard in the House. He discharges 
 his various functions under the directions of the Speaker.
 
 THE SERJEANT-AT-ARMS 205 
 
 But it is rarely necessary for the Speaker to give an 
 order, and a reply or explanation from the Serjeant-at- 
 Anns is never needed. 
 
 The Serjeant-at-Arms receives a salary of 1 200, and 
 has, besides, an official residence adjoining the Speaker's 
 in the Palace of Westminster. The deputy Serjeant-at- 
 Arms, who, wearing the same official dress as the Ser- 
 jeant-at-Arms, takes turns at sitting on guard in the 
 big chair at the Bar, receives a salary of dCSOO a year 
 with a residence in the Palace. There is also an assistant 
 Serjeant-at-Arms. He, however, never appears on the 
 floor of the House, but attends to the administrative 
 work of the office outside the Chamber. He has 500 
 a year and ^150 as an allowance for a house. The 
 department of the Serjeant-at-Arms costs altogether 
 ^P9703 per annum, most of which goes in salaries, for, 
 in addition to the principal officials already mentioned, 
 there are twenty door-keepers and messengers (recog- 
 nised by the brass chain and badge of Mercury which 
 each wears across his breast), who assist under the 
 directions of the Serjeant-at-Arms in maintaining order 
 among " strangers Vl in the House, and in carrying mes- 
 sages between members of Parliament. 
 
 o 
 
 The Serjeant-at-Arms is appointed by the Sovereign 
 personally. He is supposed, indeed, to be merely lent 
 to the House of Commons, but he may, by resolution of 
 the House, be removed from his office for misconduct 
 without the assent of the Crown. There is, however, 
 only one such dismissal on record in Parliamentary 
 annals, and it is so interesting in its details as to be well 
 worth recounting. In 1675 an appeal from the decision 
 in a civil action heard in one of the high courts, in 
 which a member of Parliament was the victorious party,
 
 206 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 was taken to the House of Lords. But the Commons, 
 jealous of their privileges, held that the prosecution of 
 any suit in the House of Lords in which a member of 
 the House of Commons was concerned, was a breach of 
 privilege, and they ordered the counsel for the appellant, 
 under threat of fine and imprisonment, not to plead at 
 the Bar of the Upper Chamber. The House of Lords, 
 however, commanded the counsel to appear before them 
 and plead, or suffer similar pains and penalties for dis- 
 obedience ; and preferring, evidently, to face the wrath 
 of the Commons to the wrath of the Lords, the counsel 
 decided to go on with the suit. Accordingly Sir John 
 Churchill, who was the leading counsel for appellant, 
 rose in the court in Westminster Hall to plead the 
 cause of his client, and was immediately arrested by the 
 Serjeant-at-Arms, acting under the directions of the 
 Commons, and detained in custody in that official's 
 residence at Westminster. On being informed of what 
 had happened, the Lords at once sent " Black Rod " 
 (who discharges some of the duties of a Serjeant-at- 
 Arms for the Upper Chamber) with a peremptory 
 demand for the release of the imprisoned counsel. In a 
 weak moment the Serjeant-at-Arms (Sir James Nor- 
 folke) yielded to "Black Rod," and without having 
 obtained the order of the Commons, gave Sir John 
 Churchill his liberty. The indignation of the Commons 
 in thus being worsted in their pretty little quarrel with 
 the Lords was vented on the unhappy Serjeant-at-Arms. 
 They peremptorily dismissed him from his post, and sent 
 an address to the King to appoint another Serjeant-at- 
 Arms in his place, declaring that he was guilty of having 
 " betrayed his trust in not executing his office accord- 
 ing to the orders and directions of this House."
 
 THE SERJEANT-AT-ARMS 207 
 
 One of the chief duties of the Serjeant-at-Arms is to 
 attend the Speaker. With the heavy mace on his 
 shoulder, he accompanies the Speaker to the Chair at 
 the opening of every sitting ; and at the close of the 
 sitting, again carrying the mace, he leads the way for 
 the Speaker out of the Chamber, while his messengers 
 in the lobbies cry out, " Who goes home ? " He attends 
 the Speaker in like manner when the Speaker is sum- 
 moned by " Black Rod " to the House of Lords ; but 
 though he carries the mace high on his shoulder through 
 the lobbies that lie between the two Chaml>ers, he 
 humbly lowers it as he reaches the threshold of the 
 I 'pper House, and leaves it outside so that it may not 
 affront the imperious gaze of the Lords. 
 
 But only those who have been in the House of 
 Commons on one of those rare occasions when some 
 violator of the privileges of the House is brought to the 
 Bar for judgment, have seen the Serjeant-at-Arms in 
 all his glory. Parliament is a High Court of Justice as 
 well as a legislative body. It can redress its own 
 wrongs, avenge all insults to its dignity, and vindicate 
 its privileges. Like all courts, high or low, it has the 
 power to summarily punish disobedience of its orders 
 and mandates, indignities offered to its proceedings, 
 assaults upon the persons, or reflections upon the cha- 
 racters of its members, or interference with its officer 
 in the discharge of their duties. The Serjeant-at-Arms 
 can arrest, under the warrant of the Speaker, issued by 
 order of the House, any person anywhere within the 
 limits of the kingdom. In the execution of the warrant 
 he can call on the aid of the civil power ; he can, if he 
 thinks necessary, requisition the assistance of the mili- 
 tary, and break into a private residence between sunrise
 
 208 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 and sunset, if he has reason to suspect that the person 
 he is in search of is inside. 
 
 Having secured his prisoner, the Serjeant-at-Arms 
 brings him to the House of Commons. A brass rod, 
 which is telescoped in a receptacle close to the chair of 
 the Serj can t-at- Arms, is pulled out and stretched across 
 the Bar, or line, which marks the technical boundary of 
 the Chamber. The sight of that glittering rod is then 
 as thrilling as the spectacle of the judge fixing on his 
 black cap to impose a sentence of death. Here the 
 prisoner stands. To his right is the Serj eant-at- Arms, 
 carrying the mace on his shoulder. At the other end 
 of the Chamber, standing on the dais in front of the 
 Chair is Mr. Speaker, in his flowing silk gown, his face 
 sternly set under his huge wig a terror-inspiring figure 
 on such occasions delivering in the weightiest words he 
 can command, amid the dramatic hush of the crowded 
 House, the sentence or reprimand of the House, on the 
 violator of its ancient privileges. The last occasion on 
 which this spectacle was witnessed in the House of 
 Commons was in 1887, when a youth named Reginald 
 Bid mead was brought to the Bar in the custody of the 
 Serj eant-at- Arms, for having got up a petition to the 
 House in reference to the coal and wine duties of the 
 City of London, in which it was found by the Com- 
 mittee on Petitions that there were over 1700 bogus 
 signatures. Mr. Speaker Peel did not impose any sen- 
 tence of imprisonment on the trembling prisoner at the 
 Bar, but he administered to him a very scathing repri- 
 mand. " You will leave this House,"" said the Speaker, 
 concluding his stirring address, " under its severe censure, 
 and under the stigma of its strong disapprobation."" 
 In former times it was compulsory on the prisoner at
 
 THE SERJEANT-AT-ARMS 209 
 
 the Bar to receive his sentence kneeling. In February 
 1751, a Scottish gentleman named Alexander Murray 
 (brother of Lord Elibank), who, in the course of a con- 
 tested election at Westminster, under the very shadow 
 of the towers of the House of Commons, spoke dis- 
 respectfully of that august assembly, and was brought 
 to the Bar to receive the sentence his audacity war- 
 ranted. But he was evidently unimpressed by the 
 crowded benches, by the Speaker (Mr. Onslow) standing 
 erect on the dais, or by the Serjeant-at-Arms with the 
 mace on his shoulder, for he refused to kneel though the 
 Speaker sternly roared at him, " Your obeisances, sir ! " 
 " You forget yourself ! " "On your knees, sir ! " " Sir," 
 said Mr. Murray, " I beg to be excused ; I never kneel 
 but to God." " On your knees, sir ! " again roared the 
 Speaker. " Your obeisances. You must kneel." But 
 the proud spirit of the Scot revolted against this indig- 
 nity. Down on his knees Mr. Murray would not go. 
 " That," said he, " is an attitude of humbleness which 
 I adopt only when I confess my sins to the Almighty." 
 He was adjudged guilty of having aggravated his 
 original offence by "high and dangerous contempt," 
 and he was committed to Newgate. A committal to 
 prison by either House lapses at the termination of the 
 Session, and so when Parliament was prorogued the 
 doors of his prison had to be flung open for Mr. Murray. 
 The House of Commons, however, did not think that 
 three or four months' 1 incarceration adequately purged 
 the Scotsman of his audacious offence. Next Session, 
 therefore, the Serjeant-at-Arms was sent to his resi- 
 dence with a warrant for his arrest. But he had fled, 
 and though a reward of 500 was offered for his appre- 
 hension he was never again captured. 
 
 o
 
 210 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Twenty years afterwards the custom requiring pri- 
 soners to kneel at the Bar of the House of Commons 
 was abolished. The last prisoner to suffer this indignity 
 was a journalist Mr. Baldwin, the publisher of St. 
 James's Chronicle. On March 14, 1771, he was censured 
 for publishing a report of the proceedings of the House, 
 and was compelled to prostrate himself abjectly before 
 the awful majesty of the assembly he had outraged. In 
 1772 a " Standing Order" was passed inspired, as John 
 Hatsell (the Clerk of the House) ingenuously suggests, 
 by "the humanity of the House"" by which it was 
 ordered that all future delinquents should receive the 
 judgment of the House standing. The Lords, however, 
 have never formally renounced this usage by Standing 
 Order. Warren Hastings was obliged to kneel at the 
 Bar of the House of Lords on being admitted to bail in 
 1787 after his impeachment ; and again, at the opening 
 of his trial in the following year, he appeared kneeling, 
 until directed to rise by the Lord Chancellor. "I can,"" 
 he afterwards wrote, half pathetically and half indig- 
 nantly, " with truth affirm that I have borne with in- 
 difference all the base treatment I have haxl dealt to me 
 all except the ignominious ceremonial of kneeling 
 before the House."" Even when he was called to the 
 Bar to hear his acquittal announced by the Lord Chan- 
 cellor, eight years afterwards, he had to undergo the 
 same offensive and humiliating ordeal. The Lords, 
 however, have not for many years required a prisoner to 
 kneel at the Bar. 
 
 Persons of all soils and descriptions, as the Journals 
 of the House show, have been brought to the Bar of the 
 Commons by the Serjeant-at-Arms for disobedience of 
 the orders and rules of the House; for indignities offered
 
 THE SERJEANT-AT-ARMS 211 
 
 to its character or proceedings, for assaults or insults 
 upon members, reflections upon their character and con- 
 duct in Parliament, or for interference with the officers 
 of the House in the discharge of their duties, and have 
 been committed to prison, or censured by Mr. Speaker. 
 Some very whimsical breaches of privilege have been 
 brought to the notice of the House. A gentleman 
 named Hyde, who tried to obtain admission to West- 
 minster Hall to witness the impeachment of Warren 
 Hastings, was rudely jostled out into Palace Yard by a 
 police constable. Hyde had the constable served with 
 a summons for assault. But the constable complained 
 to the House, and Hyde was arrested by the Serjeant- 
 at-Arms, brought to the Bar, and committed to prison, 
 for a breach of privilege in endeavouring to bring an 
 officer of the House to answer a charge before the 
 ordinary legal tribunals of the land. But perhaps the 
 most amusing instance was one in which a newspaper 
 reporter figured. " Dick " Martin, a well-known and 
 popular Irish M.P. in the Twenties (he it was who 
 founded the excellent Society for the Prevention of 
 Cruelty to Animals) was greatly perturbed to find one 
 morning in a London newspaper some passages of a 
 speech he had delivered in the House on the previous 
 night printed in italics. He complained to the House 
 of having been misrepresented, and the offending re- 
 porter who happened to be a fellow-countryman of 
 Mr. Martin was brought to the Bar for a breach of 
 privilege. The journalist pleaded that the report was 
 absolutely correct. " It may be,"" replied the indignant 
 Irish representative, "but I defy the gentleman to prove 
 that I spoke in italics ! " The reporter was dismissed 
 amid the laughter of the House.
 
 212 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 But it is not alone to" strangers'" who have offended 
 against the dignity and majesty of the House of Com- 
 mons that the Serjeant-at-Arms is a terror-inspiring 
 personage. Even members of the House may have 
 occasion to fear the dread touch of his hand on their 
 shoulder. Of the large number of new members 
 returned at the General Election few, if any, are proba- 
 bly aware of the fact which, indeed, is not generally 
 known even to old members that the Clock Tower 
 contains a suite of rooms for the confinement of members 
 of Parliament who may be adjudged guilty by the 
 House of some serious breach of its privileges or some 
 outrage on its decorum which merits imprisonment. 
 A member of Parliament arrested at the order of the 
 Speaker was formerly sent, like " strangers " guilty of 
 breaches of privilege, to Newgate, or to the Tower. 
 But in the present Palace of Westminster, six rooms 
 are specially provided in the Clock Tower for the 
 accommodation of members of Parliament committed 
 to prison by the Speaker, while " strangers "" sentenced 
 to imprisonment by the House are lodged in Newgate. 
 About half-way up the Clock Tower, and under the 
 home of that popular London celebrity, " Big Ben,"- 
 perhaps the best known public clock in the whole 
 wide world are the apartments two suites of rooms, 
 each consisting of two bed-chambers, one for the pri- 
 soner, and the other for one of the messengers of the 
 Serjeant-at-Arms, who acts as gaoler, and a comfort- 
 ably furnished sitting-room, about twenty feet long by 
 fifteen feet wide. There is, therefore, accommodation 
 for two prisoners and two gaolers in the Clock Tower, 
 which has been found amply sufficient during the forty- 
 five years the Palace of Westminster has now been built.
 
 THE SERJEANT-AT-ARMS 213 
 
 Any number of prisoners above two would be lodged in 
 Jess comfortable quarters in Newgate. * 
 
 Access to, or egress from, these rooms, can only be 
 obtained through the residence of the Serjeant-at-Arms, 
 who is responsible for the custody and well-being of a 
 Parliamentary prisoner. The apartments are by no 
 means cheerless or comfortless. The windows command 
 a view of the Thames and Westminster Bridge on one 
 side, and of Palace Yard on the other, and though im- 
 prisonment under any conditions is an undesirable posi- 
 tion, it must be said that in the Clock Tower it is de- 
 prived of most of its terrors. The prisoner may rise 
 when he pleases. His meals are supplied from the 
 catering department of the House of Commons, and he 
 can have what he likes, but he must defray the expense. 
 After breakfast he is permitted to take an hour's 
 recreation on the terrace of the House of Commons, 
 accompanied by his gaoler and a police officer in plain 
 clothes, and, if he chooses, he may repeat the exercise 
 for the same length of time before dinner. And should 
 his term of imprisonment extend over a Sunday, he may 
 attend service in St. John's Church the edifice, close to 
 the Palace of Westminster, whose four stunted turrets 
 look at a distance like dining-tables turned upside down 
 to which he is accompanied by his guards. 
 
 The last occupant of the prison was the late Mr. 
 Bradlaugh, M.P., whose confinement there for twenty- 
 four hours in 1880 was an episode in his exciting and 
 long-drawn out contest with the House of Commons on 
 the Oaths question before he was allowed to take his 
 seat as member for Northampton, to which he was first 
 elected in the General Election of 1880. 
 
 The practice of the House of Commons in recent
 
 214 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 times was to commit a person it has pronounced guilty 
 of a violation of its privileges, to the custody of the 
 Serjeant-at-Arms, to be detained during its pleasure. 
 The imprisonment generally continued until the prisoner 
 expressed contrition for his offence, or the House resolved 
 that he be discharged. 
 
 Similar contumacy on the part of a member of Par- 
 liament nowadays, would hardly be visited by imprison- 
 ment. Expressions which are considered " unparlia- 
 mentary," and therefore out of order, are allusions to 
 debates in the House of Lords, or " in another place," 
 as the Upper Chamber is usually referred to in the 
 Commons ; treasonable or seditious words ; the use of 
 the Queen^s name insultingly, or with a view to influence 
 debate ; offensive or insulting words against the charac- 
 ter and proceedings of Parliament; offensive personal 
 allusions to members of Parliament; reference to matters 
 pending judicial decision in the courts of law ; and 
 reflections on judges, or on other persons in high 
 authority. The House always insists on offensive words 
 being withdrawn, and on an ample apology being made 
 by the offending member. 
 
 If a member's conduct is grossly disorderly, or if he 
 refuses to apologise for an unparliamentary expression, 
 the Speaker or Chairman orders him to quit at once 
 the precincts of the House for the remainder of the 
 sitting, and if he refuses to leave, he is removed by the 
 Serjeant-at-Arms and his messengers. If suspension for 
 the remainder of the sitting be deemed by the Speaker 
 or the Chairman an inadequate punishment for the 
 breach of order, the offending member may be named. 
 Formerly the process of naming a member was a vague 
 terror, the consequences of which nobody knew, and, of
 
 THE SERJEANT-AT-ARMS 215 
 
 course, all the more awe-inspiring on that account. 
 There is a story told that a Speaker who was once 
 asked what would happen if a member were named, 
 replied solemnly : " The Lord in heaven only knows. 1 " 
 But we all know now ; for several members have been 
 named within the past fifteen years. The Speaker or 
 the Chairman simply says : " I name you, James Thomas 
 Millwright, 11 or whatever the cognomen of the offending 
 member may be. The motion of suspension which 
 follows the naming of a member is moved by the Leader 
 of the House, or, in his absence, by some other leading 
 member of the Government. It is simply and briefly 
 worded. It runs : " I beg to move that James Thomas 
 Millwright, member for Peddlington, be suspended from 
 the service of the House." 1 It is at once put to the 
 House or Committee, no amendment or debate, or even 
 an explanation by the offending member being allowed. 
 If the incident happens in Committee, and the motion 
 is carried, the proceedings of the Committee are sus- 
 pended, the Speaker is sent for forthwith, and the 
 House resumes. The Speaker then puts the same ques- 
 tion without amendment or debate, and if again carried, 
 the member thus suspended must withdraw forthwith 
 from " the precincts of the House," a term officially 
 interpreted as " the area within the walls of the Palace 
 of Westminster."" It will be noticed that the period of 
 suspension is not mentioned in the motion. But the 
 Standing Order provides that for the first offence it is 
 to be one week, for the second a fortnight, and for each 
 further offence one month. Suspension, whether it be for 
 a week, a fortnight, or a month, involves the forfeiture 
 of the right of entry to the lobby, the smoking and 
 dining rooms, and, indeed, to any portion of the Palace,
 
 216 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 unless the offender is serving on a Private Bill Committee. 
 Practically, the offender has ceased for the time being 
 to be a member of Parliament. 
 
 The House has also the power to expel members. 
 This punishment is only meted out to members guilty 
 of gross criminal offences, and does not disqualify for 
 re-election if an expelled member can get a constituency 
 to return him. But to " name"" a member is the highest 
 coercive authority invested in the Speaker or Chairman, 
 for dealing with disorderly conduct within the House. 
 It would be a very grave breach of the privileges of the 
 House, or very indecorous conduct within its walls, that 
 would in our times bring a member of Parliament to 
 the Clock Tower. A solemn and severe reprimand 
 administered by the Speaker, while the offending 
 member stood in his place in a House thronged by his 
 colleagues, would probably be deemed sufficient, except 
 in an exceptionally bad instance of disorderly behaviour. 
 Thus has the office of the Serjeant-at-Arms been prac- 
 tically deprived of what must have been at all times an 
 unpleasant and irksome responsibility.
 
 217 
 
 CHAPTER XII 
 THE COMMONS AT WORK 
 
 " HATS off! Way for the Speaker ! " With these words 
 of command the opening of every sitting of the House 
 of Commons is heralded. They strike the notes of the 
 supremacy of the Speaker and the reverence paid to his 
 exalted position, which are so noticeable during a sitting 
 of the House of Commons. The command is uttered in 
 the lobby, or antechamber of the House, by the in- 
 spector of the police on duty in and about the Palace of 
 Westminster, just as the Speaker emerges from the 
 corridor leading from his residence. 
 
 This appearance of the Speaker is not without an 
 element of stately picturesqueness. First comes an 
 usher; then the Serjeant-at-Arms with the mace on his 
 shoulder, followed by a couple of door-keepers dressed 
 like the usher, in low-cut waistcoats, short jackets, knee- 
 breeches, and silk stockings; then the Speaker, in his 
 huge court wig and his long gown, which is held up by 
 a train-bearer, followed by the Chaplain in a Geneva 
 gown ; and lastly, two more door-keepers, attired, like 
 all the figures in the profession, in sober suits of solemn 
 black. As the procession slowly treads its way across 
 the bright tesselated pavement of the lobby, while the 
 members stand by with heads reverently uncovered, its 
 sombre hue is emphasised by the ornate frame in which
 
 218 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 it is set the richly moulded grey walls, the wonderful 
 oak carving, the stained-glass windows ; the fretted roof, 
 with its multi-coloured grooves and its dependent 
 electric-light chandeliers in heavy brass ; all of which 
 help to make this famous vestibule of the House one of 
 the most beautiful architectural features of the Palace 
 of Westminster. The procession disappears through the 
 open portals of the House, the members in the lobby 
 crowd in after it, the doors are then locked, and the 
 voice of the principal door-keeper crying "Speaker at 
 prayers " is heard resounding through the lobby. 
 
 Only the occupants of the ladies" gallery have the 
 privilege of seeing members at prayers. All other 
 " strangers " are rigidly excluded from the Chamber. 
 The ladies are probably permitted to look on at the 
 ceremony because, cooped up as they are, most un- 
 gallantly, behind a thick heavy brass network known as 
 " the grille, 1 ' 1 their presence can hardly be regarded as 
 an intrusion that is felt at this solemn part of the 
 proceedings. 
 
 When the doors are closed behind the procession, the 
 Speaker walks up the floor of the House, bowing low to 
 the empty Chair which he is about to occupy, and 
 accompanied only by the Serjeant-at-Arms and the 
 Chaplain. The train-bearer and the door-keepers stop 
 at the Bar. The Speaker does not take the Chair at 
 once, but stands at the head of the table with the 
 Chaplain by his side. Then, in the silent Chamber, 
 three brief prayers are impressively recited by the 
 Chaplain, while the responses are given in a solemn 
 voice by the Speaker. One prayer is for the Queen, 
 another for the Royal Family, and the third, which is 
 for the Parliament, is as follows :
 
 THE COMMONS AT WORK 219 
 
 Almighty God, we thine unworthy servants, here 
 gathered together in Thy Name, do most humbly beseech 
 Thee to grant, that we having Thy fear always before our 
 eyes, and laying aside all private interests, prejudices, and 
 partial affections, the result of all our counsels may be to 
 the glory of Thy blessed Name, the maintenance of true 
 religion and justice, the safety, honour, and happiness of 
 the Queen, the public wealth, peace, and tranquility of 
 the realm, and the uniting and knitting together of the 
 hearts of all persons and estates within the same, in true 
 Christian love and charity, one towards another, through 
 Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour. Amen. 
 
 The members stand in their places on the benches, 
 fronting each other, with the floor between, until, 
 after the prayers, one of the Collects is recited, 
 when they all turn round and face the wall. Service 
 over, the Speaker enters the Chair, and the Chaplain 
 retreats backwards, bowing to the Speaker at every few 
 steps of his retrograde movement, and not unfrequently 
 colliding with members who throng the floor, until he 
 reaches the refuge of the Bar, when, making his final 
 bow to the Chair, he disappears through the now open 
 swing-doors of the Chamber. At the same moment a 
 subdued noise of rushing feet is heard in the galleries. 
 "Strangers" are now being admitted to the House. 
 The representatives of the Press enter over the Speaker's 
 Chair, and the general public come in at the other end 
 over the portal of the Chamber. 
 
 A first visit to the House of Commons is usually 
 attended by a feeling of disappointment. The limited 
 size and unpretentious character of the Chamber strike 
 the visitor with surprise. It is hardly credible to him 
 that in this simple, modest Chamber the destinies of a
 
 220 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 mighty Empire are controlled ; that this has been the 
 scene of many exciting and momentous battles between 
 political parties since 1852 ; and that these walls have 
 really echoed with the potent voices of great Parlia- 
 mentarians of the present reign Lord John Russell, 
 Palmerston, Cobden, Disraeli, Bright, Paruell, Churchill, 
 and Gladstone. A Chamber of great spaciousness and 
 more magnificence was designed for the Commons by 
 the architect of the Palace, Sir Charles Barry, in 1837, 
 but the five Commissioners to whom the plans were 
 submitted decided in favour of a much smaller room, in 
 which debate could be earned on without any undue 
 strain on the voice. The Chamber, which was first 
 occupied in 1852, accommodates with seats only 360, or 
 little more than half the members of the House, while 
 about 100 more can find standing room at the Bar 
 and in the passages. Instances of the accommodation 
 afforded by the Chamber being taxed to its utmost 
 limits are, however, exceedingly rare. The two most 
 remarkable occasions in recent years were the introduc- 
 tion by Mr. Gladstone of his Home Rule Bills in 1886 
 and in 1893, when about sixty additional seats were 
 provided by temporary chairs placed in rows on the 
 floor. For ordinary purposes the Chamber is large 
 enough. Indeed, the actual attendance of members 
 within the walls of the Chamber is rarely in excess of 
 the sitting accommodation. 
 
 But if the visitor in the galleries, who has probably 
 come a long way to get a look at the great House of 
 Commons at work, is at first disappointed with the 
 plain and severe architectural features of the Chamber, 
 the feeling does not last long. He looks around 
 and sees many objects and personages which the news-
 
 THE COMMONS AT WORK 221 
 
 papers have made familiar to him by name, and he falls 
 at once under the influence of the stirring memories and 
 great associations of the place. He regards with awe 
 the high canopied Chair, surmounted by the Arms of 
 the Kingdom, at the head of the Chamber, and looks 
 with becoming reverence on Mr. Speaker in his big grey 
 wig and black gown. Beneath the Speaker, at the head 
 of the table, sit the Clerk of the House and the two 
 assistant-clerks, in short wigs and gowns, like banisters 
 in the courts of law (they always receive new wigs when 
 a new Speaker comes into office), busy discharging their 
 multifarious duties, such as sub-editing the " Orders of 
 the Day," questions to Ministers, amendments to Bills, 
 notices of motions handed in by members, and taking 
 minutes of the proceedings for the Journals of the 
 House. The table is indeed a "substantial piece of 
 furniture,"" as Mr. Disraeli described it on a famous 
 occasion when he expressed his delight that it lay 
 between him and Mr. Gladstone, who had just made a 
 fierce declamatory attack upon him. It contains volumes 
 of the Standing Orders and Sessional Orders, and other 
 works of reference in regard to the procedure of the 
 House, and also pens, ink, and stationery for the use of 
 members. 
 
 At the end of the table, on either side, are two brass- 
 bound oaken boxes. These are the famous " despatch- 
 boxes 11 on which Ministers and ex-Ministers lay their 
 notes when addressing the House, and, following the 
 great example of Mr. Gladstone, thump to give em- 
 phasis to an argument. Both boxes contain marks 
 and indentations caused by the big signet ring that 
 Mr. Gladstone wore on one of the fingers of his right 
 hand, when at times in power on the Treasury Bench
 
 222 
 
 and at times in Opposition on the Front Bench at the 
 other side of the table, he brought his clenched fist, 
 while speaking, with tremendous force on the one box 
 or the other. 
 
 But of all the objects in the House which awaken 
 historic associations, the mace, perhaps, is the most 
 potent. It lies a prominent object, when the Speaker is 
 in the Chair, on raised supports at the end of the table. 
 It is of wrought brass, its large globular head is .sur- 
 mounted by a cross and ball, its staff' has several artistic 
 embellishments, and the whole is so well burnished that 
 it glistens like gold. There have been three maces in 
 the House of Commons. The old original mace dis- 
 appeared when Charles I. met his death on the scaffold 
 in 1649, and its fate has never since been traced. 
 Cromwell ordered another mace to be made, which was 
 used during part of the ten years the Commonwealth 
 lasted, and this, curiously enough, was the mace which 
 the great Protector slightingly referred to as "that 
 bauble " as he ordered it to be removed from the table 
 of the House on that historic occasion, in April, 1653, 
 when he summarily dismissed " the Rump " of the Long 
 Parliament. That mace also disappeared. It was said 
 some years ago that the mace in use in the Legislative 
 Council of Jamaica, which sits at Kingston, was Crom- 
 well's "bauble,"" but Mr. Speaker Peel had a corre- 
 spondence on the subject with the authorities of the 
 colony, and came to the conclusion that the historic 
 claim of their mace was spurious. The third mace, 
 which is now in use, bears neither date, inscription, nor 
 maker's name, but the initials " C. R."" It was placed 
 in the House on the restoration of Charles II. in 1660. 
 
 From the carved oak-panelled walls of the Chamber
 
 THE COMMONS AT WORK 223 
 
 on either side of the table slope down five rows of 
 benches, upholstered in dark green morocco leather. 
 Those on the Speaker's right are the Government 
 benches the benches of the " ins " or the party in office; 
 those on the Speaker's left are the benches of the "outs" 
 or the party in the cold shades of Opposition. Between 
 the two sides is a broad floor covered with a rough 
 fibre matting. The rows of benches at each side are 
 divided in the centre by a narrow passage with steps that 
 run up from the floor to the Avail. This passage on either 
 side is called " the gangway, 11 and has its own special 
 political signification. Members who sit above the gang- 
 wav that is, nearer to the Speaker's Chair and the table 
 either on the Government side or on the Opposition 
 side, are regarded as the out-and-out or orthodox sup- 
 porters of the recognised leaders of their party ; while 
 those who sit below the gangway are supposed to be 
 somewhat independent of the occupants of the front 
 bench on their side of the House. The Irish Nationalist 
 members have since the rise of Mr. Parnell in 1878 sat 
 below the gangway on the Speaker's left in permanent 
 Opposition, no matter what party may be in office ; but 
 the respective followers of the two great political 
 parties, the Conservatives or Unionists, and the Liberals, 
 cross the floor according as their party is " in " or 
 " out." 
 
 Lower down the Chamber, on the Opposition side and 
 close to the swing-doors which form the main entrance, 
 is the large chair of the Serjeant-at-Arms. Beside it is 
 the Bar, the line of which, marking the technical 
 boundary of the House, is raised about half an inch 
 above the level of the floor. Over the portals of the 
 Chamber, and directly facing the Speaker, is the clock.
 
 224 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 At either side of this door are three benches, one of 
 which on each side the nearest to the oak-panelled 
 wall and cut off' from the others by a high iron railing 
 is reserved for visitors. These seats are commonly 
 referred to as " under the clock." Over the clock are 
 the strangers 1 galleries. The first on the left facing 
 the Speaker is reserved for peers. The Prince of Wales 
 and the Duke of York sit there on their occasional visits 
 to the House of Commons. The corresponding gallery 
 to the right is reserved for " distinguished strangers," 
 such as ambassadors and members of the various diplo- 
 matic and consular services. Each of these galleries has 
 only two benches and accommodates not more than two 
 dozen persons. Behind these exalted quarters and cut 
 off from them by a high barrier is the gallery of the 
 general male public. It holds about 120 persons, but 
 half the visitors on the back seats can see only the top 
 of the Chamber, with the Speaker, the table, and the 
 two front benches. Admission to all the strangers" 
 galleries save of course the peers' and the front seat of 
 the distinguished strangers' 1 , which is reserved for am- 
 bassadors is obtained by ticket from the Serjeant-at- 
 Arms through a member of Parliament. Running along 
 on either side of the Chamber are two other galleries, 
 each with a double tier of seats, for the use of members. 
 The Speaker may be addressed by a member from these 
 galleries, and occasionally a question has been asked, 
 but a speech has never been delivered from them. The 
 Press gallery is over the Speaker's Chair, and over that 
 again may be seen, set into the ornamental stone screen 
 at the end of the Chamber, the brass trellis which 
 fronts the ladies' gallery. 
 
 But the Chamber does not depend alone on its his-
 
 THE COMMONS AT WORK 225 
 
 toric associations to arouse the interest of the visitor. 
 If it appeal's at first sight to be but plainly decorated, 
 a closer examination will show that it possesses a certain 
 air of stately solidity. The oak wainscot with which its 
 walls are lined from floor to ceiling and the Gothic 
 woodwork of the surrounding galleries are of the most 
 delicate carving. The prevailing colour of the Chamber 
 is undoubtedly rather sombre the colour of its lining 
 of rich oak. The monotony of the hue is, however, 
 relieved to a slight extent by the panels emblazoned with 
 the coats of arms and distinguishing badges of the Sove- 
 reigns from William the Conqueror to Victoria, arranged 
 along the front of the surrounding galleries, and the 
 stained glass of the row of windows at each side by which 
 the Chamber is lighted during the day. But it is at 
 night when the lights are blazing and the Chamber is 
 full of warmth and glow and animation that the House 
 of Commons looks its best. Even the most unobservant 
 visitor to the House cannot fail to notice and admire 
 the ingenious manner in which it is illuminated. The 
 original lofty oaken roof, on which many cunning 
 carvel's had expended rare artistic skill, having been 
 found to impair the acoustic properties of the Chamber, 
 a novel ceiling was designed to act as a sounding-board 
 and also to light the House. It fulfils both purposes 
 splendidly. The ceiling is of glass of a light yellow 
 tint the hue of the primrose with delicate floral 
 decorations, and is divided by richly carved oaken ribs 
 into as many as forty-eight panels. A large number of 
 gas lights are arranged on the outer side of the ceiling, 
 and when they are turned on a flood of light, most 
 pleasant to the eyes, comes through the glass panels 
 and fills the Chamber with its soft mellow radiance.
 
 226 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 The House is also ventilated and warmed by a very 
 costly and elaborate system. The floor under the fibre 
 matting is formed of perforated iron plates. Beneath 
 the floor is a large chamber into which the air is 
 pumped from the sheltered quadrangles of the Palace, 
 passing on its way through muslin and sprays of water, 
 and in time of fog through layers of cotton wool, to 
 clear it of dust and other impurities ; and then, after 
 being heated in the winter or cooled in the summer, it 
 is introduced into the House through the floor, and 
 drawn out again through several ornamental ventilators 
 which depend from the glass roof. 
 
 So much for the surface of things. We will now see 
 the Commons at work. The first half-hour after the 
 Speaker takes the Chair is usually dull. Private Bills 
 or Bills introduced on behalf of the promoters of certain 
 commercial or municipal undertakings are then con- 
 sidered. But the proceedings are generally formal, and 
 devoid of interest. Petitions are also presented to the 
 House at this stage of the sitting. A member is bound 
 to present any petition forwarded by constituents even 
 though he may be opposed to its prayer unless it 
 contains something objectionable. The presentation, 
 however, need not be done publicly. The document 
 may be quietly deposited in one of the big black bags 
 which are hung for the purpose on either side of the 
 table, and no one in the House need be made a bit the 
 wiser. Frequently a member rises in his place, and 
 announcing that he has a petition to present, reads a 
 brief summary of the prayer or request of the peti- 
 tioners. The Speaker then asks, " Will the honourable 
 gentleman bring it up ? " and the honourable gentleman 
 walks up to the table and drops the petition out of
 
 THE COMMONS AT WORK 227 
 
 sight and out of mind into the yawning mouth of the 
 big black bag. Sometimes a gigantic petition with 
 millions of signatures, rolled round a cylinder until it 
 assumes the proportion of the wheel of a steam-roller 
 is trundled into the House before the sitting, and 
 deposited on the middle of the floor until it is duly 
 presented at the appointed time. Such petitions are 
 invariably forthcoming when a Bill affecting "the 
 Trade "" or the public-house interest is introduced by 
 the Government. What a waste of energy is there in 
 these mammoth rolls ! Their appearance is greeted 
 with laughter or smiles by members. After they have 
 been formally presented they are quickly removed out 
 of sight by the attendants, and, leaving no impression 
 on the mind of the Legislature beyond a ripple of merri- 
 ment, they will be heard of no more though their 
 presentation is always recorded on the Journals of the 
 House unless the Committee on Public Petitions, 
 before whom in due course they will come for scrutiny, 
 find that some of the regulations have not been carried 
 out that, for instance, portion of the petitions, instead 
 of being in writing, is printed, or lithographed, or type- 
 written, or that some of the signatures are in the same 
 handwriting, or denote personages whose existence is 
 manifestly fictitious, when the fact is solemnly an- 
 nounced by the Chairman of the Committee, and the 
 whole House for a minute or two looks indignant at the 
 affront offered to its dignity. The petition is a fine old 
 crusted institution, but it has no merit beyond its 
 venerable age. 
 
 The Chamber has .now rapidly filled up for " ques- 
 tion time, 11 which is usually remarkable if for nothing 
 else for the number and variety of subjects about
 
 228 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 which members interrogate Ministers. Two or three 
 days' notice at least must be given of a question. One 
 of the Clerks at the Table receives the questions in 
 writing; and they are printed, with the dates on 
 which they will be asked, on the notice paper, contain- 
 ing announcements of coming events, which is circu- 
 lated every morning among the members. Copies of 
 these papers are also sent to the different State Depart- 
 ments. In each Department the questions addressed 
 to the Minister at its head are cut out, and the answers 
 prepared by the permanent officials of the Department, 
 without the Minister being troubled with them in any 
 way, except, perhaps, occasionally when the matter 
 inquired about is of such importance that the officials 
 think it well to obtain the opinion of their chief in 
 regard to it. 
 
 Every day's questions are then printed in the 
 " Orders of the Day," or the daily agenda of the pro- 
 ceedings of the House. The answers are brought to 
 the House before the sitting opens by messengers from 
 each office, in a despatch-box, one key of which is kept 
 at the Department and the other by the Minister in 
 charge ; and as question time approaches Ministers may 
 be noticed slipping into the Chamber, with their little 
 boxes, by the door immediately behind the Speaker's 
 Chair, which gives access to the corridors containing 
 their private rooms. 
 
 Formerly every question was read out by the member 
 in whose name it stood in the paper. A much simpler 
 and more expeditious system now prevails. The ques- 
 tions as they appear on the " Orders of the Day " are 
 numbered, and the members responsible for them rise 
 in their places when called on in succession by the
 
 THE COMMONS AT WORK 229 
 
 Speaker and simply say, as the case may be, " I beg to 
 ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
 question No. 1 ;" or, " I beg to ask the Chief Secretary 
 for Ireland question No. 44."" The Home Secretary looks 
 up question No. 1, or the Chief Secretary for Ireland 
 question No. 44, from the bundle of answers supplied 
 him by the officials of his Department, and reads it in 
 reply. And so on, until the list of questions is com- 
 pleted. The questions and replies are eagerly followed, 
 evoking cheers and counter cheers. Oftentimes, indeed, 
 the reply to a question which gives dissatisfaction if 
 it be further aggravated by the sarcastic or flippant 
 manner of the Minister will precipitate the House 
 into one of the wildest, stormiest, and most passionate 
 scenes that have ever disturbed its decorum. 
 
 There has been a most remarkable increase in the 
 number of questions within recent years. In the 
 Session of 1857 451 questions were asked. By 1877 
 they had increased to 1343, and now as many as 2000 
 on an average appear upon the notice paper each 
 Session. On some days during recent Sessions no 
 fewer than 90 questions have been placed upon the 
 notice paper, while the average number may safely be 
 stated as between 50 and 60 per day. These numbers 
 are multiplied very considerably by the practice of 
 putting supplementary questions in order to try to 
 extend the information vouchsafed in the official replies. 
 Most of the questions are undoubtedly of great general 
 importance, but others of them are of merely local 
 interest such as those dealing with the defective 
 postal service in a little village up in the Highlands 
 of Scotland, or the conduct of Constable Muldoon in 
 some district in the far West of Ireland ; and, as each
 
 230 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 occupies two minutes on an average, the suggestion has 
 often been made that questions of a trivial, local or 
 personal character should be communicated direct to the 
 Departments concerned, so as to economise the time of 
 the House. But members generally regard with great 
 jealousy this privilege of catechising Ministers publicly 
 in the House on any and every subject they please, and 
 consequently receive with disfavour all suggestions that 
 make for its curtailment. 
 
 Questions disposed of, we come as a rule to the real 
 legislative business of the sitting. A motion for the 
 adjournment of the House occasionally intervenes. The 
 object of such a motion is to obtain from the Govern- 
 ment immediate and adequate explanation of some act 
 of commission or omission on their part ; of something 
 which, in the opinion of the Opposition or other section 
 of the House, they have wrongly done or left undone. 
 The matter complained of must be as the Standing 
 Order says of "urgent public importance" in the 
 opinion of the Speaker, and must also have the con- 
 currence of at least forty members. Therefore, when a 
 member rises after questions and asks leave to move 
 the adjournment of the House, stating at the same 
 time the object of the motion, the Speaker asks whether 
 the hon. gentleman is supported by forty members. 
 Immediately the associates of the hon. gentleman rise 
 in their places, and if they muster forty the debate 
 proceeds. The Speaker rarely rules the motion out of 
 order on the ground that it is not a matter of " urgent 
 public importance." He is content to accept on that 
 point the opinion of forty members. The carrying of 
 such a motion is an occurrence just as rare. Of the 
 few instances on record the last happened in 1889,
 
 THE COMMONS AT WORK 231 
 
 when a motion censuring the police authorities for the 
 arrest of a Miss Cass in Regent Street on a charge of 
 disorderly conduct was unexpectedly earned against 
 Mr. Home Secretary Matthews. The House imme- 
 diately adjourned. The cry of "Who goes home?" 
 was heard at seven in the evening instead of at one in 
 the morning. 
 
 Every obstacle to proceeding with legislative business 
 being now removed, the Speaker rises and says, " The 
 Clerk will now proceed to read the Orders of the Day," 
 and the Clerk, with a copy of the " Orders of the Day" 
 in his hand, reads the first of the long list of Bills down 
 for consideration. A big debate probably follows. 
 Mr. Disraeli once said, " The House of Commons is a 
 dull place, but there are moments of emotion." Yes, 
 there are moments of emotion in the House of Com- 
 mons which make the life of a member of Parliament 
 well worth living. To the stranger the House of 
 Commons is always an interesting place, and always 
 well worth a visit. But it is most interesting on the 
 occasion of a big debate on some important question, 
 which arouses political passions and prejudices, and 
 brings down into the arena of the floor of the House 
 the chiefs of the parties to fight out the issue with the 
 keen and subtle weapon of the tongue. 
 
 A big debate often lasts a fortnight that is to say, 
 it is carried on during the Mondays, Tuesdays, Thurs- 
 days, and Fridays of two weeks, the AVednesdays being 
 usually devoted to the consideration of Bills introduced 
 by unofficial members. The order in which the leading 
 members of the Government and of the Opposition 
 speak is previously arranged by the Whips of the 
 different parties; and the Speaker, being informed
 
 232 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 privately of the understanding, calls on these members 
 in the order appointed, no matter how many small men 
 may, at the same time, strive to catch his eye. A 
 member of the Opposition always follows in debate a 
 member of the Government. The opening of a sitting 
 and towards its close, or before and after the "dinner 
 hour " that is, from five till seven o'clock, and from 
 ten o'clock till twelve are considered the best and 
 most favourable times for speaking. It is during these 
 periods of the sitting that the " big guns " on each side 
 are brought into action. Under the rules of the House, 
 all opposed business must cease at twelve o'clock, and 
 the member who at that hour moves the adjournment 
 of the debate has the right to open it the next evening. 
 If a member of the Government speaks last at night, 
 the adjournment of the debate is moved by an opponent 
 of the Government ; and vice versa, if a member of the 
 Opposition concludes his speech at midnight, a sup- 
 porter of the Administration secures the advantage of 
 resuming the debate on the following evening. 
 
 This privilege of moving the adjournment is always 
 reserved to men of distinction. Sometimes there are 
 many eager claimants for the privilege. There is often 
 a good deal of parleying and wrangling about it, and it 
 is no easy task for the Whips to arrive at a decision in 
 the matter without wounding the pride and vanity of 
 some of the members whose claims have been set aside. 
 There are several reasons which explain this eagerness 
 to secure the adjournment of the debate. A crowded 
 House has a most exhilarating influence on a speaker, 
 and there is sure to be a large attendance of members 
 at the opening of the sitting. When the distinguished 
 member who has been called upon to resume the debate
 
 THE COMMONS AT WORK 233 
 
 has finished his speech, some man of mark in the party 
 
 on the opposite side of the House rises to answer him, 
 
 in accordance with the programme arranged by the Whips. 
 
 ' These two speeches will probably last till seven o^clock. 
 
 From seven till ten o^clock is known as the " dinner- 
 hour " ; and it is only during this period of a sitting, 
 when a great debate is in progress, that small or un- 
 distinguished men can have the pleasure of addressing 
 the House. Before seven or after ten, the member who 
 can only " twinkle a taper " has no chance ; the member 
 who can " flare a flambeau "" then holds the field. Con- 
 sequently, during the dinner-hour, when the vast bulk 
 of the members are in the dining-room or smoking-room 
 of the House, or are dining outside, or are at the 
 theatre, the small men, or the new men, who desire to 
 speak, have the Chamber all to themselves. There are 
 hardly ever more than twenty members present some- 
 times the attendance falls as low as a dozen or half-a- 
 dozen and these remain, not because they are interested 
 in the speeches which are then being made, but simply 
 and solely because each of them is anxious to lay his 
 views on the subject of debate before his own constitu- 
 ents, through the medium of the reporter of the local 
 paper who is above in the Press Gallery. 
 
 Feeble statement, pointless argument, irritating 
 repetition, are usually the characteristics of a debate 
 during the dinner-hour. It is then that the House of 
 Commons is a dreary place indeed. It is then that the 
 bore is in his element. He comes down to the House 
 fearfully equipped with material for his speech. Papers, 
 documents, and notes surround him while he is speaking 
 some being in his hands, some in his hat, and others 
 spread over the empty bench behind him. The lot of
 
 234 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Mr. Speaker during these dull hours is by no means 
 a happy one. Members can come and go as they 
 please. If they remain in the Chamber, they need pay 
 no attention to the honourable gentleman on his feet ; 
 they can chat and joke with each other or double them- 
 selves up comfortably on the benches and go roving in 
 the land of Nod. But save for half an hour between 
 eight and nine o'clock, when the proceedings are sus- 
 pended, Mr. Speaker must remain in the Chair and 
 follow, or seem to follow, all the speeches, however Hat 
 and discursive, with the deepest and most absorbing 
 interest. 
 
 But perhaps that air of concentrated attention the 
 Speaker habitually wears is simulated. Perhaps prac- 
 tice has made it possible for him to hear without heed- 
 ing. Perhaps while he smiles appreciatively at the 
 broken-winded witticisms of the hon. member who is 
 speaking, he is deaf to every word, and his thoughts are 
 far away, and the murmur of woods or the soothing 
 lapping of water on the sands is in his ears. It is 
 quite possible, indeed. We have heard more than once 
 of the happy judge who could fall asleep during the 
 speeches of counsel, and wake up when the sweet, slum- 
 berous tones of the gentlemen learned in the law had 
 ended. 
 
 The Speaker's lot would indeed be intolerable if he 
 were unable, during some of the dreary addresses of 
 hon. and learned and gallant members, to ramble in 
 spirit, but he cannot put an extinguisher on a tire- 
 some member. All he can do is to call a member to 
 order for irrelevance or repetition, and on the third un- 
 heeding warning, to direct him to resume his seat. 
 The House, however, shows its resentment by discon-
 
 THE COMMONS AT WORK 235 
 
 certing cries and exclamations. A member who was 
 once subjected to considerable interruption while ad- 
 dressing the House, appealed to the Speaker, Sir Spencer 
 Compton, to put down the disturbance, saying that he 
 had a right to be heard. " No, sir,"" replied the Speaker, 
 " you have a right to speak, but the House have a right 
 to judge whether they will hear you." 1 
 
 No Speaker would venture in our days to make such 
 a ruling, but at the time it was delivered the duty of 
 the Speaker was not so much to preserve order and 
 decorum in the Legislative Chamber, as to "speak" 
 the opinion or decision of the House in matters of great 
 State concern. But even in our days members enjoy 
 considerable licence in expressing their dissent from the 
 views that are being laid before them, or their desire to 
 bring an irritating speech to a speedy conclusion, by 
 interrupting cries of " 'Vide, Vide, Vide ! " without 
 having to fear any reprimand from the Chair. Cries of 
 dissent were not so decorous as late as fifteen or twenty 
 years ago. It was then the custom of hon. gentlemen 
 to endeavour to suppress sentiments obnoxious to them bv 
 barking like dogs, crowing like barndoor fowls, bleating 
 like sheep, braying like donkeys, and by indulging in 
 coughing, sneezing, and ingeniously extended yawning. 
 
 These interruptions are to some men only an incen- 
 tive to extend the scope of their unappreciated remarks. 
 " If you don't allow me to finish my speech in my own 
 way 111 not leave off at all," said a member who was 
 regarded as a bore. The threat had the desired effect. 
 " I am speaking to posterity," said another member 
 grandiloquently, in reply to his interrupters. "Faith, 
 if you go on at this rate," remarked a voice from the 
 Irish quarter, " you will see your audience before you."
 
 236 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 " Sir," said the member on his legs but, unhappily 
 not his last legs " I can afford to wait." 
 
 It is a rather curious circumstance that it was not 
 until 1882 that the House, or rather the party in office, 
 possessed the power to terminate a debate which, in its 
 opinion, was being deliberately prolonged for the pur- 
 pose of causing embarrassment. The explanation, no 
 doubt, is that obstruction, as a potent weapon of Par- 
 liamentary tactics, was the invention of Mr. Parnell in 
 the late 'seventies, and that the use to which it was put 
 by the Nationalists in the early "eighties clearly demon- 
 strated that if it were not shattered, party legislation 
 might well become impossible. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone's cloture resolution was accordingly 
 carried on November 11, 1882, in an Autumn Session 
 held specially for the purpose of considering it. It gave 
 power to the Speaker or the Chairman of Committees, 
 when it appeared to him that " the evident sense of the 
 House "" was in favour of an immediate division, to so 
 inform the House, or Committee, and, on a motion 
 being made, to put the question under discussion forth- 
 with. Mr. Brand was Speaker. At nine o'clock on 
 the morning of Wednesday, February 1, 1881, he had 
 terminated a sitting which lasted forty-two hours, or 
 from the preceding Monday at four o'clock, debating 
 the introduction of Mr. Forster's Bill for the Better 
 Protection of Person and Property in Ireland, by refusing 
 to call upon any more of the Nationalist members to 
 speak and thereupon peremptorily putting the question. 
 This was admittedly an arbitrary and coercive proceed- 
 ing. There was no rule, written or unwritten, to j ustify 
 it. It was unwarranted by practice or precedent, but 
 that it was in accordance with " the evident sense of
 
 THE COMMONS AT WORK 237 
 
 the House 11 was indisputable. Mr. Brand, however, 
 never applied the cloture rule (or the " closure " as it is 
 now commonly called) which was based on his high- 
 handed action in the preceding year. It was employed 
 for the first time on February 28, 1885, close on two- 
 and-a-half yeai-s after it had become a standing order, by 
 Mr. Speaker Peel, against the Nationalist members. In 
 the division on the question " that the question be now 
 put " which always follows the application of the closure, 
 the ayes on this particular occasion were 207 and the 
 noes 46. Now the rule provides that the closure must 
 be supported by more than 200 members if the minority 
 is over 40, or by 100 members if the minority is under 
 40. A reduction of the majority by seven votes would 
 therefore have rendered ineffectual this invocation of the 
 closure by the Speaker. Mr. Peel consequently had a 
 very narrow escape from a serious rebuff, which would 
 probably have been followed by his resignation. It was 
 unlikely that the Speaker would again run this risk. In 
 any event the application of the closure on the initiative 
 of the Speaker tended to establish embittered relations 
 between members and the Chair; and it was a wise 
 move on the part of the Conservative Administration 
 in 1887 to relieve the Speaker of this onerous and 
 unpleasant responsibility, by giving power to any mem- 
 ber private or official to move the closure at any 
 time, leaving, however, to the Speaker the discretion of 
 putting, or refusing to put, the motion from the Chair, 
 as he thought fit. 
 
 It must not be supposed from some of my preceding 
 remarks that the House of Commons is tolerant only of 
 the participation in its debates of men of eloquent 
 tongues men of great ability and knowledge, men
 
 238 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 with a pleasant knack of saying funny things or with 
 the dangerous gift of saying caustic things members, in 
 a word, who are interesting or entertaining. The House 
 nowadays accords for a time to the crank, the faddist, 
 and the bore especially if these tiresome individuals 
 show evidence of earnestness, sincerity, and honesty the 
 kindliest and most indulgent of receptions. It denies 
 its ear to no man. It will listen with pleasure to any 
 man who has anything to say ; it will listen with resig- 
 nation to the windbag the man who takes a long time 
 to say what he has to say, or even to a man who has 
 nothing to say the man who has 
 
 The gift of lungs 
 Without, alas, the gift of tongues. 
 
 But while allowing to every man, no matter how dull 
 his manner or objectionable his views, sufficient latitude 
 to give at an opportune time ample testimony of the 
 faith that is in him, the House cannot stand the irre- 
 pressible bore who, determined to speak on every subject, 
 rises, as a rule, at the most inopportune moment of the 
 debate to give expression to his vague and ill-formed 
 views at unconscionable length ; or the member, however 
 able, who in his effort to instruct it adopts the irritating 
 tone of the pedagogue or the superior person. These 
 members are not popular, even with their own party. 
 But while a party cannot very well join with the enemy 
 across the floor in showing their contempt and exaspera- 
 tion by shouting down some objectionable member of 
 their own ranks, they heartily sympathise in secret with 
 these demonstrations of disapproval. 
 
 The House is kindest and most considerate to the 
 member who rises for the first time to address it, or to
 
 THE COMMONS AT WORK 239 
 
 make, as the phrase has it, his " maiden speech." He 
 always gets precedence in a competition to " catch the 
 Speaker's eye." It is well, however, that such a member 
 should display a certain amount of nervousness or defer- 
 ence, inspired by a modest appreciation of his own 
 capabilities or by a becoming awe of the assembly 
 listening to his words. If, relying perhaps on a reputa- 
 tion made outside the House in politics or literature, he 
 should adopt a tone of superiority, or an attitude of 
 perfect ease and self-confidence, he is certain to arouse 
 the antipathy of members opposite, and chill even the 
 greetings of the political friends who sit around him. 
 
 Mr. Joseph Chamberlain has told a very good story 
 illustrative of this peculiar mood of the House of 
 Commons, which perhaps some would ascribe to its 
 morbid self-esteem, and its exalted sense of its own 
 importance. When he was first elected, an old friend 
 of his, who was also an old member of the House of 
 Commons, came to him and said, " Would you mind, 
 as I am an older member, my giving you a bit of 
 advice r" 1 "I would be very glad to have it," replied Mr. 
 Chamberlain. " Well," continued the old man, " you 
 know you have come into the House of Commons rather 
 late, and you have come in with some sort of reputation 
 from outside. The House of Commons," he went on, 
 " does not like outside reputation ; it is accustomed to 
 make and unmake its own ; and as you are going very 
 shortly to make your maiden speech, if you could con- 
 trive to break down a little, I think the House of Com- 
 mons would take it as a compliment, and you would be 
 all the better for it ! " 
 
 There have been a few funny failures to " bring off" 
 maiden speeches. Many a member has been so stricken
 
 240 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 with Parliamentary fright, on rising to address the 
 House for the first time, that his awkward effort to get 
 through a speech he had previously conned hundreds of 
 times probably, and the manuscript of which he held in 
 his trembling hand, was a spectacle painful to look at, 
 despite its occasional ludicrousness. But the most 
 extraordinary breakdown that ever occurred in the 
 House happened some years ago in connection with the 
 motion for an Address to the Queen in reply to the 
 Speech from the Throne. The motion was to be 
 seconded by a young country member in a maiden 
 speech. He came attired, as is customary on the 
 occasion, in the gorgeous uniform of a captain of 
 mounted Yeomanry. He stood up in his place imme- 
 diately that the mover of the motion concluded, and, 
 grasping the hilt of his sword with his left hand, he 
 indulged in some graceful gestures with his right ; but 
 though his lips were seen to move, not a sound could be 
 heard by the House. For close on five minutes the 
 honourable and gallant gentleman continued this dumb 
 show and then sat down. It was indeed a singular 
 manifestation of Parliamentary fright. The most re- 
 markable feature of the incident was that the honourable 
 and gallant gentleman did not himself miss the sound of 
 his vocal organ. All through the incident he seemed to 
 be under the impression that the House was listening 
 with wrapt attention to his eloquent periods set to the 
 exquisite music of his voice. 
 
 The varying aspects of the House of Commons during 
 a big debate are surprising. Members are continually 
 entering the Chamber or leaving it by the portals 
 under the clock. Immediately outside these portals 
 is the lobby, that neutral ground of the House
 
 THE COMMONS AT WORK HI 
 
 of Commons where men who scowl at each other 
 metaphorically at least across the floor of the House 
 during a hot party debate meet subsequently to soothe 
 each other's ruffled feelings by retailing racy stories. 
 But it is now ten o'clock, and the House is rapidly 
 filling up again in every part. Many of the members 
 who crowd the benches are in evening dress. They have 
 been dining out or attending some other social function, 
 or have been at a theatre and have hurried away to the 
 House in order to hear the two concluding speeches of 
 the debate. It has been arranged that some leading 
 member of the Opposition will speak shortly after ten 
 o'clock, and that he will be followed on behalf of the 
 Government by a distinguished occupant of the Treasury 
 Bench. After that, probably about twelve o'clock, the 
 division will be taken. 
 
 Accordingly, about ten o'clock, a small man small, 
 that is, in reputation, and not physically who has been 
 so fortunate as to secure the last chance of the un- 
 important men during the "dinner hour," brings his 
 speech to a conclusion and sits down. Then follow the 
 two speeches which every one in the House is so anxious 
 to hear the last attack by the leader of the Opposition 
 and the defence by the champion of the Government. 
 The House is moved by great excitement during the 
 delivery of these speeches. There are cheers and shouts 
 of defiance ; and statements and denials, charges and 
 recriminations are hurled across the floor of the House. 
 It is on such an occasion that the advantages of a 
 diminutive Chamber are seen and appreciated. The 
 gas lights stream down through the glass panels of 
 the ceiling on a House that is now crowded to its 
 utmost capacity. Every member present may not be 
 
 Q
 
 24* THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 comfortably seated, but in a small Chamlxr like this all 
 can command a complete view of the situation and hear 
 the speeches distinctly. This tends to keep the debate 
 at a high level. The audience are not compelled to give 
 a strained attention to the orator. They are therefore 
 more susceptible to the music of his periods, and their 
 cries and acclamations reacting on him, inspire him to 
 higher flights of eloquence. 
 
 There is also a great rhetorical advantage, or aid to 
 invective, in having the rival political parties on different 
 sides of the Chamber, separated by a broad floor. With 
 the enemy straight before him, the orator can point the 
 finger of scorn at them with tremendous effect. This 
 was a favourite gesture of Mr. Gladstone during his 
 passionate and emotional speeches. Flinging himself 
 almost half-way across the table, and shooting out his 
 right arm, he would point the extended forefinger at the 
 occupants of the front bench opposite, his face ablaze 
 with righteous indignation and infinite disdain in his 
 voice ; while they, instead of being transfixed in mental 
 agony, beamed with delight that they should be the 
 objects of the great orator's fiery rhetorical wrath. 
 
 But the last word has now been said. The great 
 debate has closed, and now comes the division, which is 
 often especially when the result is uncertain the most 
 exciting and most dramatic episode of the debate. Let 
 us suppose that the debate is on the motion for the 
 second reading of some big Government measure, like 
 the Home Rule Bill or the Bill for the Disestablishment 
 of the Welsh Church. Mr. Speaker rises in his Chair 
 and puts the question, " The question is that this Bill 
 be now read a second time. As many as are of that 
 opinion will say ' Aye."" " A deafening shout of " Aye "
 
 THE COMMONS AT WORK 243 
 
 arises from the Government benches. " The contrary, 
 ' No, 1 " continues Mr. Speaker, and a thunderous volley 
 of " Noes " comes in response from the Opposition side 
 of the House. " I think the ' Ayes ' have it," says Mr. 
 Speaker. The Speaker always decides in favour of the 
 side supported by the Government, unless the motion be 
 of a non-party character, when he decides according to 
 the volume of sound from the "Ayes'" and the " Noes." 
 But in most cases the decision of the Speaker is not 
 accepted. The Opposition again roar out, "The 'Noes 1 
 have it," and thus the division is challenged. 
 
 The Speaker then gives the order, " Strangers will 
 withdraw," and at the same moment the electric bells, 
 which are set up in profusion all over the precincts of 
 the Palace of Westminster in every corridor and in 
 every room ring out a summons to members to hurry 
 to the Chamber, as the division is about to be taken. 
 The policemen who are on duty in the lobbies and 
 corridors also shout " Division ! " with all the strength 
 of their lungs, and so, amid the tingling and the jingling 
 of the electric bells, cries of " Division " answer other 
 cries of " Division " in every part of the Palace. 
 
 This ringing and shouting continue for two minutes 
 marked by a sand-glass in front of one of the clerks 
 at the table which is the time it is supposed a member 
 would take to get to the Chamber from the most distant 
 point of the members'" quarters. Into the House the 
 members come rushing breathlessly from dining-rooms, 
 library, and smoking-rooms, while the sands in the glass 
 are running their course. At length the Speaker makes 
 a sign to the Serjeant-at-Arms, and the doors of the 
 Chamber are locked. They cannot be opened again 
 until the division is taken. It often happens that a
 
 244 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 tardy member, arriving just a moment too late, has the 
 doors slammed right in his face. This is what occurred 
 when the newspapers announce that Mr. Robinson or 
 Mr. Jones was " shut out." 
 
 The question is again put in the same form by the 
 Speaker. There is still time for those who have 
 challenged the decision of the Speaker to give way ; and 
 occasionally they do give way when the question is not 
 of great party importance. But on this occasion the 
 second declaration of the Speaker, " I think the ' Ayes ' 
 have it, 11 is answered again by a shout from the Opposi- 
 tion benches, " The ' Noes ' have it."" The die is now 
 cast. The division lobbies must decide the issue. The 
 Speaker accordingly adds, "'Ayes' to the right and 
 4 Noes ' to the left," and names the two chief Government 
 Whips as the tellers for the former and the Whips of the 
 Opposition as the tellers for the latter. 
 
 The members then pour out into the division lobbies, 
 which are two long and wide corridors or passages 
 running round the Chamber. The supporters of the 
 " Ayes " come up the House and enter their lobby by the 
 door behind the Speaker's chair ; the " Noes " go down 
 the House and file into their lobby by the door under 
 the clock. When the House is cleared, the entrance 
 doors of the division lobbies are locked, and the exit 
 doors are opened to allow the two streams of members 
 to return to the Chamber again at the end opposite the 
 one by which they left it. In each lobby two clerks sit 
 at a desk, each with a list of members alphabetically 
 arranged before him. At one side of the desk there is 
 a large card with the letters, "A to M " ; and on the 
 other side of the desk another card with " N to Z." The 
 members pass this desk in single file each on the proper
 
 THE COMMONS AT WORK 245 
 
 side, according to his initial letter giving their names 
 to the clerks, who tick them off on the printed papers 
 before them. In this way a record of the members who 
 take part in each division is taken, and is published as 
 part of the proceedings of the House. 
 
 It is interesting to note that for some time after this 
 wise and proper system of recording votes was introduced 
 in 1836, as a result of the enormous increase of popular 
 interest in the proceedings of the House brought about 
 by the Reform Act of 1832, the old members regarded 
 it with considerable disfavour ; and the tellers who then 
 discharged the task of taking the record often found it 
 difficult to obtain the names of some of the members as 
 they intentionally pushed pass them in the division 
 lobbies. The tellers now merely count the numbers. 
 At the exit door of each lobby stand two of the tellers, 
 one representing the Government and the other the 
 Opposition, who count the members as they pass out 
 and go into the House again, one teller checking the 
 other in the counting, and thus obviating any dispute 
 between them as to the result. 
 
 The average time a division occupies is ten minutes ; 
 but some big divisions, in which most of the members 
 participate, take a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes. 
 At length all the members have returned from the 
 division lobbies, and the work of counting is over. The 
 tellers appear in the Chamber, and give to one of the 
 clerks at the table their respective numbers. The 
 victors will now be known in a moment. The clerk 
 writes the figures on a slip of paper, which he hands to 
 the principal teller of the side that has won. Immedi- 
 ately, a roar of delight which lasts for a couple of 
 seconds arise from the triumphant majority. They do
 
 246 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 not wait for the announcement of the exact result. 
 They know now that they have won by what majority 
 does not for the moment concern them and they 
 rejoice accordingly. Now we shall hear the numbers. 
 The four tellers meet in a row in front of the table ; 
 the tellers for the victors to the left, the tellers for the 
 vanquished to the right, and after the four have bowed 
 simultaneously to the Chair, the principal teller for the 
 majority reads out the numbers in a loud voice : "'Ayes 1 
 to the right, 298 ; ' Noes ' to the left, 290." 
 
 What a narrow escape for the Government ! It is now 
 the turn of the Opposition to shout, and so they lift 
 their voices in exultation with all the energy they can 
 command, whilst the occupants of the Ministerial 
 benches answer back with mocking laughter and cries of 
 defiance. " Order, order ! " is heard from Mr. Speaker, 
 and silence is once more restored. The result of the 
 division must be announced from the Chair. The paper 
 containing the figures has been passed on by the clerk to 
 the Speaker as the tellers return to their places on the 
 benches. " The ' Ayes ' to the right were 298 ; the 
 ' Noes ' to the left 290," says the Speaker, and he adds : 
 " so the ' Ayes ' have it." Once more the cheering and 
 shouting and yelling are renewed ; the Government 
 delighted that they have won, the Opposition rejoicing 
 over the narrowness of the escape of their opponents. 
 
 The scene which follows a close division after a great 
 debate in the House of Commons is one that can hardly 
 ever be forgotten, even by a spectator. The intense passion 
 of the moment is contagious. Every one is swayed by 
 it. Even the most staid and solemn members of our 
 great Legislature cheer and shout like schoolboys, and 
 wave their hats over their heads, and slap each other on
 
 THE COMMONS AT WORK 247 
 
 the back in the turbulence of their emotions. Out into 
 the lobby they stream, friends and opponents together, 
 laughing and joking, and chaffing each other good- 
 humouredly ; for though they have angrily stormed at 
 each other across the floor at exciting moments of the 
 debate, now that all is over amity and good-fellowship 
 once more reign supreme. In another minute the 
 doorkeeper cries, " Who goes home ? " and the extin- 
 guishing of the great white light on the Clock Tower 
 tells London that the House of Commons has adjourned.
 
 248 
 
 CHAPTER XIII 
 GETTING A BILL THROUGH PARLIAMENT 
 
 " I CAKE no more for the laws and constitution of this 
 country than I do for the laws and constitution of Tim- 
 buctoo." These irreverent words were used in a London 
 police-court by a woman charged with riotously ushering 
 in the New Year under the shadow of St. Paul's. The 
 magistrate sent her to prison for a fortnight; and I 
 think that if the fortnight in Holloway Prison had been 
 supplemented by another fortnight in the House of 
 Commons, during the consideration of a big Bill, the 
 haughty spirit of this female scorner of our laws and 
 constitution would have been for ever abashed and 
 humbled. For if Holloway demonstrates the might 
 and power of the law of the land, the House of Com- 
 mons shows what a difficult and complicated task is the 
 making of that law, what infinite patience and labour 
 are expended in the work ; and also throws many inter- 
 esting and instructive sidelights on the working of our 
 constitution that vague, shadowy and indeterminate 
 thing in many respects; that curious combination of 
 numerous Parliamentary enactments, of multitudes of 
 reports of judicial decisions in the courts of justice, of 
 unwritten codes of ancient traditions, usages and under- 
 standings, and of accepted political precepts and maxims, 
 which is the result of fourteen hundred years of slow,
 
 GETTING A BILL THROUGH PARLIAMENT 249 
 
 gradual, historical development, " broadening down," in 
 Tennyson's inimitable phrase, " from precedent to pre- 
 cedent/'' 
 
 A Bill is the original draft or outline of a legislative 
 proposal which, if it passes through both Houses, and 
 receives the royal assent, becomes a statute or Act of 
 Parliament. Bills are of two kinds, private and public. 
 Private Bills, as we shall see later, are introduced to 
 enable private individuals, associated together in com- 
 panies, boards or corporations, municipal or commercial, 
 to undertake, at their own risk, railways, canals, tram- 
 ways, gas or water works, and other works of public 
 convenience and utility, the construction and working 
 of which involve interference with the private rights of 
 individuals. 
 
 Public Bills, on the other hand, deal with matters of 
 public policy by which the whole community is affected. 
 Such Bills generally originate in the House of Commons 
 the Lords being debarred from introducing any Bill 
 that involves expenditure from the National Exchequer 
 but every Bill, whether it be introduced in the Com- 
 mons or in the Lords, passes through practically the 
 same ordeal in both Chambers in succession. I deal, 
 however, with Bills which originate in the Commons. 
 
 Getting a big Government Bill through the House of 
 Commons is, indeed, a Herculean achievement. The 
 legislative machine is, in its working, elaborate, compli- 
 cated and slow. A Bill has to pass through no fewer 
 than five distinct and different stages in both Houses, 
 before the last ceremony of the royal assent can be per- 
 formed. But it must not be forgotten that before a great 
 Government measure, like the Parish Councils Bill the 
 last great Bill that passed through Parliament, and
 
 250 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 which therefore I will use for the purposes of illustra- 
 tion is introduced into the House of Commons at all, 
 months have to be spent on its preparation. The 
 Parish Councils Bill of 1893 contained about seventy 
 clauses. Its principles were first laid, in the rough, 
 before the Cabinet by the President of the Local 
 Government Board ; and after much consideration and 
 discussion, no doubt, the Cabinet agreed to a particular 
 scheme of parish government. Then came the work of 
 drafting the Bill. The Government draughtsmen 
 eminent lawyers, who are adepts at the curious and 
 quaint and circumlocutory language used in all Bills 
 and the leading permanent officials of the Local Govern- 
 ment Board, devoted many weeks to the labour of em- 
 bodying in close on seventy clauses, the principles of 
 parish government, few in number, probably, which 
 were originally agreed upon by the Cabinet. 
 
 Before a Bill can be introduced in the House of 
 Commons leave must be asked and obtained. A notice, 
 similar to the following, appeal's on the " Orders of 
 the Day " the daily agenda of the proceedings in the 
 House : 
 
 SIR JOHN GORST, 
 
 To ask leave to introduce a Bill for " The Improve- 
 ment of Primary Education in England and 
 Wales." 
 
 At the appointed time the Minister in charge of the 
 Bill makes his motion for leave, which he accompanies 
 with a speech explaining the provisions of the Bill. In 
 the case of an important measure, which arouses party 
 feeling, it is usual for the Opposition to indulge in a 
 brief criticism of some of its most contentious principles ;
 
 GETTING A BILL THROUGH PARLIAMENT 251 
 
 but it is the custom to allow the motion for leave to 
 introduce the Bill to pass unchallenged by a division. 
 The Bill is only printed and circulated amongst members 
 after it has been read a first time, and, of course, until 
 its provisions are fully before the House no determina- 
 tion can be properly come to as to the action to be taken 
 in regard to it. Therefore the usage of allowing a Bill 
 to be introduced without opposition is very rarely 
 departed from, and only when in the opinion of some 
 section of the House grave and urgent reasons exist for 
 fighting the measure at every stage. 
 
 Leave having been given unanimously, or earned on a 
 division, the Speaker rises and asks, " Who is prepared 
 to bring in the Bill ? " The Minister in charge of the 
 measure replies by reading out the names of three or 
 four members of the Administration, including himself, 
 who have, as the Parliamentary phrase has it, " backed 
 the Bill," and whose names appear on it, as its sponsors, 
 when it is printed. The ceremony of introducing the 
 Bill is then gone through. It is a very short and simple 
 procedure. The Minister goes down to the Bar, and 
 walking up the floor to the table, amid the welcoming 
 cheers of the supporters of the measure, hands the Clerk 
 what purports to be a copy of the Bill. But it is merely 
 a dummy copy a folded sheet of paper with the title 
 of the Bill written on the outside. Indeed, I have 
 occasionally seen a Minister, on obtaining leave to 
 introduce a Bill, pick up from the table the nearest 
 sheet of notepaper to hand, and while the rafters of the 
 House rang loud and long with the enthusiastic plaudits 
 of the admirers of the measure, solemnly hand the Clerk 
 the piece of virgin paper as a copy of " The Criminal 
 Law Procedure (Ireland) Bill"" the official title of the
 
 252 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Crimes Bill of 1887, or the " Bill to Amend the Pro- 
 vision for the Government of Ireland,"" as the Home 
 Rule Bill of 1893 was styled. 
 
 The Clerk on receiving the dummy copy of the Bill, 
 reads out its title, and adds "second reading."" 
 "What day?" asks Mr. Speaker. The Minister in 
 charge mentions a date, as, for instance, " Thursday, the 
 14th of March,"" and thus is fixed the day for the next 
 stage, or second reading of the Bill, when the battle 
 over its proposals really commences. A debate, extend- 
 ing over a week or a fortnight, according to the con- 
 tentious character of the measure, follows, in the course 
 of which the principles of the Bill are attacked by the 
 Opposition, and defended by the party in office who 
 are responsible for it on broad and general lines. A 
 division invariably follows such a debate. An amend- 
 ment is moved stating the grounds of opposition to the 
 measure, or it inns " That this Bill be read this day 
 six months,"" which is practically a rejection. If, how- 
 ever, the second reading is earned, the principles of the 
 Bill have received the approval of the House. 
 
 Then comes the most important stage of all, the 
 Committee stage, during which the details of the Bill 
 are fully considered, and the Opposition endeavour to 
 amend or reject them. But, occasionally, " instructions 
 to the Committee r) are found standing in the way of the 
 House getting into Committee on the Bill. Fourteen 
 of them, for instance, were put upon "the paper'" 1 in 
 reference to the Home Rule Bill of 1893. These 
 motions or resolutions consist of instructions to the 
 Committee to amend or alter the Bill in certain par- 
 ticulars which would not be within the capacity of the 
 Committee unless such instructions were adopted by the
 
 GETTING A BILL THROUGH PARLIAMENT 253 
 
 House. In other words, the object of an "instruction" 
 is to enable the Committee to extend or limit the scope 
 of the Bill in a way not contemplated by its authors, 
 and antagonistic to the purpose they have in view. One 
 of the " instructions " to the Committee on the Home 
 Rule Bill aimed at a contemporaneous settlement of the 
 Irish land question ; and another wanted a redistribution 
 of seats. But in the case of the Home Rule Bill, the 
 Speaker (Mr. Peel), by a stroke of authority, unique for 
 its sweeping character in the history of the Chair, and 
 which in a House governed by precedent has had the 
 effect of enormously increasing the power of the Speaker, 
 declared that, with one exception, the whole of the 
 ' instructions " were out of order. It must not, how- 
 ever, be supposed that if the Speaker had ruled other- 
 wise the " instructions " would have been adopted, and 
 that a land measure, and a reform measure to say 
 nothing of the aims of the other eleven " instructions " 
 would have been included in the Home Rule Bill. If 
 an " instruction " is in order it is moved and debated 
 like other motions, and its fate which is, generally, 
 rejection is decided in the division lobbies. 
 
 The House then goes into Committee on the Bill. 
 This is done simply enough. The Clerk reads the title 
 of the Bill "The Parish Council Bill Committee." 
 " The question is that I do now leave the Chair," says 
 the Speaker. " As many as are of that opinion will say 
 ' Aye ' ; the contrary * No. 1 I think the ' Ayes ^ have it." 
 And as his declaration is allowed to pass unchallenged, 
 he adds positively, " The ' Ayes ' have it," and forthwith 
 steps down out of the Chair and quits the House. The 
 Serjeant-at-Arms then places the mace beneath the 
 table. The Chairman of Committees takes his seat at
 
 25* THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 the table, in the Clerk's chair, and the numerous 
 amendments to the Bill, which have been handed in by 
 members, are separately considered and accepted or 
 rejected. Over 800 amendments to the Parish Councils 
 Bill were received. These amendments were regularly 
 printed every night, while the Bill was in Committee, 
 and distributed in the morning, with other Parliamentary 
 papers, to the members of the House of Commons. As 
 may be imagined, " the amendment paper " was very 
 bulky, especially in the early weeks of the Committee 
 stage ; and for a long time it showed no appreciable sign 
 of diminution, as amendments may be put down, at any 
 time of the Committee stage, to am portion of a Bill 
 not yet considered. 
 
 "The amendment paper" to a big measure like the 
 Parish Councils Bill is generally divided into sections or 
 chapters, each opening with a clause of the Bill, and 
 containing all the amendments put down to that clause. 
 Some of the amendments are long and elaborate others, 
 again, are extremely brief. Here are a few amendments, 
 taken at random from one page of the amendment paper 
 of the Parish Councils Bill, relating to the allotment 
 clause of the Bill : 
 
 MR. CHANNING, 
 
 Line 35, leave out " but not exceeding in the whole 
 
 four acres." 
 COMMANDER BETHELL, 
 
 Line 35, leave out " four/' and insert " two.' 
 MR. THOMAS HENRY BOLTON, 
 
 Line 35, leave out " four," and insert "three." 
 MR. CHAPLIN, 
 
 Line 36, before " may," insert " where the allotment 
 exceeds one acre."
 
 GETTING A BILL THROUGH PARLIAMENT 255 
 
 Mn. THOMAS HENRY BOLTON, 
 
 Line 36, after " stable," insert " or." 
 Line 37, leave out "or barn." 
 MR. COBB, 
 
 Line 37, at end, insert, 
 
 " (c) shall not require any rent to be paid in 
 
 advance." 
 MR. LOGAN, 
 
 Line 37, at end, add, 
 
 "(c) shall not require rent to be paid in advance." 
 MR. CHAPLIN, 
 
 Line 37, at end, insert, 
 " Provided also, that 
 
 " (a) An allotment shall not be divided, sub-divided, 
 or assigned without the consent of the Parish 
 Council ; 
 
 " (b) The allotment shall be cultivated by the occu- 
 pier, and shall not be used for any purpose other 
 than agriculture, as denned in section twenty of 
 the Small Holdings Act of 1892." 
 MR. HENRY HOBHOUSE, 
 
 Line 40, after "Act," insert, 
 
 " Provided that the Local Government Board shall not 
 make an order authorising the compulsory hiring of any 
 land, which by reason of its being accommodation land 
 or water meadows or otherwise is necessary for the 
 proper working of a farm of which it forms part, unless 
 the whole of the farm is included in the order." 
 
 Some of the short amendments seem utterly unintel- 
 ligible, but a glance at the clause dealt with explains 
 their aim and object. They are taken up for considera- 
 tion in the order in which they appear on the paper. 
 The Chairman calls on the member who has the first 
 amendment on the paper " Mr. Channing," for instance
 
 256 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 and Mr. Charming rises and gives his reasons for 
 moving that the words " but not exceeding in the whole 
 four acres " should be omitted from the clause. A reply 
 is then given on behalf of the Government by the 
 Minister in charge of the Bill. He may accept the 
 amendment or he may oppose it ; and if the latter course 
 be chosen, the fate of the proposal, after other members 
 have advanced reasons for and against it, is usually 
 decided by a division. 
 
 The duty of dealing, on behalf of the Government, 
 with the amendments to the Parish Councils Bill was 
 discharged by Mr. (now Sir) -H. H. Fowler, who, as 
 President of the Local Government Board, was the 
 Minister in charge of the measure. It was no easy task 
 to steer a huge Bill like this through the uncertain and 
 sometimes turbulent waters of the Committee stage, 
 avoiding the rocks and shoals that thickly abound, in 
 forms of unforeseen complications, and of waverings and 
 indecisions in the ranks of supporters. Sir Henry Fowler, 
 indeed, after close on three months of Committee on the 
 Parish Councils Bill, looked grey and worn. All his 
 time had to be given to the Bill, for he was responsible 
 for every clause and line and word of it ; and he had to 
 find reasons for accepting or rejecting each of these 800 
 amendments, according as they were moved. 
 
 Sir Henry Fowler came into the House at the opening 
 of each sitting with two huge despatch-boxes, which he 
 placed on the table in front of his seat on the Treasury 
 Bench. When these were opened, masses of documents 
 of all sorts and sizes printed, type-written, and written 
 were disclosed, and were constantly consulted during 
 the proceedings. It may be asked how Sir H. Fowler 
 carried in his head all the reasons why this amendment
 
 GETTING A BILL THROUGH PARLIAMENT 257 
 
 should be accepted and that rejected. That would, 
 indeed, have been an impossible task. What he did was 
 to produce from his despatch-boxes bundles of papers 
 containing the amendments, one pasted at the top of 
 every page, and below, clearly type-written, the points 
 of a speech, accepting it or rejecting it as the case 
 might be. These speeches were, no doubt, thought out 
 by Sir H. Fowler in the morning before the House 
 meets, dictated to his secretaries, and type-written and 
 prepared in this convenient form. The result was that, 
 no matter how fagged he might become at night in the 
 House and the proceedings as a rale are wearisome 
 and fatiguing to the Minister in charge, who can rarely 
 leave his place on the Treasury Bench Sir H. Fowler's 
 replies were always fresh and vigorous. 
 
 Sir H. Fowler got little assistance from the other 
 members of the Government. As each Minister has his 
 own department to look after, it is the rule to confine 
 himself exclusively to the affairs of that department, and 
 not to interfere in a Bill affecting any other department 
 unless invited by the Minister specially interested. 
 Therefore, on Sir H. Fowler fell almost the entire 
 burden of the work, relieved occasionally by some help 
 from Sir Walter Foster, the Secretary to the Local 
 Government Board, and from Sir John Rigby, the 
 Solicitor-General, when any amendment embodied a 
 point of law. Sir H. Fowler might now and then be seen 
 consulting with two or three gentlemen who occupied 
 one of the benches devoted to " strangers, 11 under the 
 clock, every night during the Committee stage. These 
 gentlemen were some of the permanent officials of the 
 Local Government Board the heads of the department, 
 \\ho retain their positions though Ministers may come
 
 258 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 and Ministers may go, and by whom, indeed, the work 
 of each department is earned on, no matter what party 
 may be in office. 
 
 It is a usual thing for big measures, like the Parish 
 Councils Bill, the Home Rule Bill, or the Bill for the 
 Disestablishment of the Church in A Vales, to occupy 
 between two and three months in Committee. Such 
 Bills are discussed, not only clause by clause, but word 
 by word. And while a member can speak but once 
 on any question when the House is sitting, he may 
 speak as many times as he pleases on the same amend- 
 ment in Committee. In fact, debate on an amendment 
 may be protracted to any length, according to the 
 volubility of members who desire to talk on it, if the 
 Minister in charge of the Bill does not lose patience and 
 bring the discussion to an end by moving the closure. 
 Another distinction between the House and the Com- 
 mittee is that debate in Committee is much more 
 business-like than debate in the House, with the 
 Speaker in the Chair. There is occasionally a set debate 
 on an important amendment a " field night v on which 
 all the oratorical forces of each party are brought into 
 action but, as a rule, in Committee members talk in a 
 conversational fashion, and argue the points in brief 
 pointed speeches. 
 
 The Bill, as I have said, is considered clause by clause. 
 When all the amendments to a clause have been disposed 
 of, the Chairman puts the question, " Clause 1," or 
 " Clause 20 " (as the case may be) ; " the question is 
 that this clause stand part of the Bill, 1 " or, if it has 
 undergone alteration, " that this clause as amended 
 stand part of the Bill, 11 and on that question the prin- 
 ciple of the clause may be again debated, no matter ho\v
 
 GETTING A BILL THROUGH PARLIAMENT 259 
 
 minutely it may have been previously discussed as amend- 
 ment after amendment was moved to the clause. A Bill 
 is not rejected in Committee. If, however, a vital prin- 
 ciple of a Bill is successfully attacked, or if an important 
 clause is rejected, the Bill is not only dropped, but the 
 Administration, on whom a vote of censure has been 
 thus indirectly passed, resigns thus throwing upon the 
 Opposition the responsibility of carrying on the Govern- 
 ment or appeals to the country to decide the issue in a 
 General Election. 
 
 Nevertheless, a Bill often undergoes substantial emas- 
 culation or expansion in Committee, without bringing 
 disaster to the Ministry. The Minister in charge moves 
 and carries many amendments with a view to improve 
 defects in the measure from his point of view, which have 
 been pointed out to him by friendly critics, or which he 
 has discovered himself; and other amendments proposed 
 by supporters of the Government, or even by members 
 of the Opposition, are also often accepted. The utmost 
 skill and experience of members of the House generally 
 are brought to bear on the improvement of a big Bill 
 in Committee, and when at last that stage is concluded, 
 Avhen the Chairman puts the question, " That I report 
 this Bill with amendments to the House,"" and it is 
 agreed to, there has been fashioned as good a piece of 
 legislative workmanship as human nature is capable of. 
 
 In 1882, the House of Commons, recognising that it 
 is impossible for it to do itself and within its own 
 Chamber the vast amount of legislative work, which, 
 owing to the ever-increasing claims on its attention, and 
 the ever widening extension in all directions of the opera- 
 tions of Government, it is now called upon to perform, 
 decided to delegate some of its functions to Committees
 
 260 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 or sections of itself. It therefore appointed two Stand- 
 ing Committees for the consideration of all Bills relating 
 to law, courts of justice and legal procedure, and to 
 trade, shipping, and manufactures. These Committees 
 are respectively known as the " Grand Committee on 
 Law Bills," and the " Grand Committee on Trade Bills." 
 This devolution of work has proved one of the most 
 valuable reforms ever introduced into our Parliamentary 
 procedure. Each Standing Committee, which consists 
 of not less than sixty or more than eighty members, is 
 intended to be a sort of microcosm of the whole House. 
 The members are nominated by the Committee of 
 Selection, a small body of the oldest and most ex- 
 perienced members of the House, appointed for this 
 special purpose who are guided by the principle of 
 having all parties and all sections of opinion in the 
 House fairly represented on these Grand Committees. 
 The Committee of Selection also add to a Grand Com- 
 mittee, as specialists, fifteen members having an intimate 
 acquaintance with the subject-matter of any Bill referred 
 to it, who serve on the Grand Committee while such 
 Bill is under consideration. 
 
 When a Bill dealing with questions of law or with 
 trade matters has been introduced in the way already 
 described, and is read a first time, and a second time, it 
 is committed to the Standing Committee on laAv or on 
 trade as the case may be. The Committee meets under 
 the presidency of a chairman at twelve, in one of the Com- 
 mittee-rooms upstairs, and sits till four o'clock. Twenty 
 members form a quorum. Clause after clause is considered, 
 amended, rejected or adopted, exactly as in the case of a 
 Bill before a Committee of the whole House. These 
 Standing Committees impose a very heavy additional
 
 GETTING A BILL THROUGH PARLIAMENT 2fil 
 
 strain upon members of Parliament who are nominated 
 to serve on them. But the burden is, as a rule, cheer- 
 fully borne. Many a member of talent and business 
 capacity, who, probably because of the lack of a glib, 
 eloquent tongue, has failed to make himself a prominent 
 figure on the larger stage of the House, transfers his 
 ambition for distinction to the rather obscure shades of 
 the Committee-rooms. The reporters are admitted to 
 the Committee meetings, but the newspapers allot to the 
 discussions not a tithe of the space which they would 
 devote to the same Bills before a Committee of the 
 House ; and no record of the proceedings is taken 
 by shorthand writers for the Parliamentary Debates 
 (as " Hansard " is now known), although similar 
 proceedings on identical Bills in the House are fully 
 reported. But notwithstanding the absence of this 
 incentive to devotion to duty or perhaps, I should say 
 because of its absence the details of Bills so referred to 
 Standing Committees are carefully considered, the dis- 
 cussions are brief and to the point, the divisions are 
 generally on non-party lines ; and as a result the Acts 
 of Parliament which go through this ordeal will bear 
 favourable comparison, for freedom from blots and con- 
 tradictions, with the statutes that have passed through 
 Committee of the whole House. 
 
 We have, hitherto, been considering public Bills in- 
 troduced in the House of Commons on behalf of the 
 Government. " Private members," as the unofficial 
 members of the House are called, may also bring in 
 public Bills. The forms of the House throw difficulties 
 in the way of a member who desires to relinquish his 
 legislative functions. He cannot theoretically resign his 
 seat. He must be either a bankrupt or a lunatic ; be
 
 262 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 expelled, or accept an office of honour or profit under 
 the Crown such as the nominal stewardship of the 
 Chiltern Hundreds before he can quit the House of 
 Commons. On the other hand, the forms of the House 
 afford him few opportunities of exercising his legislative 
 functions by initiating a little legislation on his own 
 account. At the opening of every Session at least three 
 hundred Bills are introduced by private members. Not 
 three per cent, of these Bills pass through all the stages 
 which are essential before they can be inserted on the 
 Statute Book. 
 
 A member has no difficulty in getting leave to bring 
 in a little Bill of his own ; having it read a first time, 
 and then printed at the expense of the State. But 
 after that all is uncertainty. The chance of having the 
 Bill inscribed on the Statute Book is small, even in the 
 most favourable circumstances ; but its progenitor may 
 at least get it debated on the motion for its second 
 reading, if he at the opening of the Session succeeds in 
 securing for it an early place or date. The ballot-box 
 is resorted to for the decision of the matter. 
 
 Members desirous of introducing Bills write their 
 names on a list at the table on the opening day of the 
 Session. Each name has got a distinguishing number. 
 Corresponding numbers on separate slips of paper are 
 placed in a box, shuffled up, and then drawn out singly 
 by one of the Clerks at the table in the sight of all the 
 members. If " 4 " is the first number drawn from the 
 box, the Clerk calls out "four""; and the Speaker, 
 looking at the list of names with which he is now pro- 
 vided, calls out the name of the lucky member, standing 
 opposite " four," who immediately rises and gives notice 
 of his intention to introduce, say, a " Bill to regulate
 
 GETTING A BILL THROUGH PARLIAMENT 263 
 
 dealings in Pig Iron by means of Warrants." For the 
 second reading of that Bill the lucky member chooses 
 the first available Wednesday (all Wednesdays being 
 private members' 1 days, till towards the close of the 
 Session, when the Government seizes them for their own 
 measures), and on that particular Wednesday the Bill 
 about dealings in pig iron appears as the first of the 
 " Orders of the Day." In the same manner the member 
 whose name is drawn second from the ballot-box, selects 
 the first place on the second available Wednesday ; and 
 so on until the first places on all the probable Wednes- 
 day sittings are appropriated, after which the second 
 places are chosen. 
 
 Fifteen years ago the Irish party introduced a novel 
 system of balloting, in order to secure favourable places 
 for their Bills. All the members of the party put down 
 their names on the list for notices of Bills ; and those 
 whose numbers are earliest drawn from the ballot-box, 
 give notice of Bills, in the order of their importance, 
 which the party at a meeting held previously decide to 
 introduce. Since then the example of the Irish party 
 has been followed by every Particularist group or section 
 of members in the House. 
 
 But unless the chances of the ballot turn out very 
 propitious, private members'* Bills what with the limited 
 time at their disposal, and the opportunities for destruc- 
 tion afforded by the forms of the House rarely reach 
 the Statute Book. The vast majority of them are killed 
 by the curious system known as " blocking." The 
 Government appropriates so much of the time of the 
 House to its own business, that Bills of private members 
 who have not had the luck of obtaining first places on 
 Wednesdays, can only come on for consideration at
 
 264 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 twelve o'clock at night, or at half-past five on Wednes- 
 day sittings. Now, as no opposed business can be taken 
 after these hours, unless a Bill meets with universal 
 favour it can make no progress. The opposition of a 
 single member is sufficient to prevent any progress being 
 made with a Bill at this period of the sitting. And if 
 that opposition is exercised, the Bill is said to be 
 " blocked/ 1 
 
 Twelve o'clock at night arrives. Government business 
 which occupied the attention of the House till that hour 
 is then postponed ; and the Clerk goes through the 
 remaining " Orders of the Day," in which as many as 
 eighty of these Bills of private members often appear. 
 The Clerk reads out the. first of the Bills "The 
 Chimney-sweepers Registration Bill."" The member 
 who has introduced it says : " Now," meaning that he 
 desires the Bill to be proceeded with there and then. 
 Immediately another member cries out : " I object, 11 
 and bang ! goes the Bill into the waste-paper basket. 
 The Bill has been " blocked ! " And so on through the 
 entire list of Bills. The witching hour of night brings 
 a terrible slaughtering of " the innocents of legislation " 
 in the House of Commons. 
 
 " Blocking " has degenerated into a system of reprisals. 
 The Bills of Liberal members are blocked by Conserva- 
 tives ; and the Bills of Conservative members are blocked 
 by Liberals. Frequently, the most pathetic appeals are 
 made at this time of the sitting. " Spare my little ewe 
 lamb ! " the author of the Bill cries out when he has 
 heard the dreaded words " I object " from the benches 
 at the opposite side of the House ; " No, no,"" comes the 
 relentless response ; " my little duckling was killed by 
 your colleagues. I must have my revenge.'"
 
 GETTING A BILL THROUGH PARLIAMENT 265 
 
 Of course, many of these Bills represent pernicious 
 fads and hobbies of members, or Quixotic attempts to 
 make straight the crooked things of this world Bills it 
 would never do to pass into law. Some members get so 
 passionately attached to a hobby that night after night, 
 Session after Session, Parliament after Parliament, they 
 will strive with untiring patience, unruffled by unfeeling 
 ridicule and cruel disappointments, to get it inserted in 
 the Statute Book. An old and eccentric member of the 
 House, who died recently, vainly endeavoured during half 
 a century of Parliamentary life to get passed into law a 
 Bill for preventing persons from standing outside windows 
 while cleaning them. During his last Session, the poor 
 old gentleman is said to have complained to a colleague 
 that his object in introducing the Bill had been quite 
 misunderstood by the House for these fifty years. " I 
 introduced the Bill," said he, " not for the sake of the 
 window-cleaners, but for the sake of the people below, 
 on whom they might fall. The idea of the Bill was 
 suggested to me by the fear that a window-cleaner 
 might fall on myself. 11 
 
 When a Bill has emerged triumphantly from the 
 Committee stage, the worst of its troubles are over in 
 the House of Commons at least. The Speaker is sent 
 for if the Committee be one of the whole House the 
 mace is again placed upon the table and the House 
 resumes. The Chairman of Committees standing close 
 to the Chair with a copy of the Bill in his hand, reports 
 to the Speaker that the measure has passed through 
 Committee. If a Bill be reported to the House without 
 amendment it may be read a third time forthwith, and 
 its career in the House of Commons be thus brought to 
 a close. But as that never happens in the case of a big
 
 266 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Government measure, such as the Parish Councils Bill, 
 a day is fixed for the fourth stage of a Bill, known as 
 " the report stage," and the Bill is usually reprinted in 
 the interval, if it has been materially amended in Com- 
 mittee. 
 
 On the report stage amendments may again be moved 
 to the clauses of the Bill, or new clauses may be proposed ; 
 or the Bill may even be recommitted to the Committee 
 again, if matters which can only be properly dealt with 
 in that stage have been overlooked. However, the 
 report stage is generally brief, the amendments being 
 usually confined to points that have not been dealt with 
 in Committee, and then comes the fifth and last stage or 
 the Bill " the third reading." A set debate in which 
 the principles of the Bill are attacked and defended, as 
 at the second reading stage, takes place, and in the case 
 of a highly contentious measure, like the Home Rule 
 Bill, occupies at least a week. But the Bill cannot now 
 be altered in any way. It can only be either adopted or 
 rejected, on a division ; and accepted it is in ninety-nine 
 cases out of ,a hundred the defeat of a Bill on its third 
 reading in the House of Commons being an extremely 
 rare occurrence. 
 
 Immediately after the passing of the Bill the Clerk 
 takes it to the Bar of the House of Lords, where, desiring 
 the concurrence of their lordships, he hands it over to the 
 Clerk of that House. If the Bill be not rejected forth- 
 with, like the Home Rule Bill of 1893, it has to pass 
 through the same identical five stages again, but not at 
 such protracted length as in the Commons. The Lords 
 may agree with the Commons in the principles of the 
 measure by reading it a second time, and yet may alter 
 it substantially in matters of detail during the Committee
 
 GETTING A BILL THROUGH PARLIAMENT 267 
 
 stage. But however trivial the alteration may be, the 
 Bill after it has passed the third reading in the Lords, 
 conies back again to the Lower House for the consent of 
 the Commons to the peers 1 amendments. The Commons 
 may agree or may not agree with the Lords in their 
 amendments. If they agree, well and good. If they 
 refuse to agree the Bill is stripped of the Lords 1 amend- 
 ments and sent back to " the other place " (as the House 
 of Lords is called in the House of Commons) in its 
 original form. Should both Houses remain inflexible 
 the Bill is dropped. If, however, a compromise smooths 
 the differences between the two Houses, the Bill is 
 passed, and remains with the Lords for the royal assent, 
 which converts it into an Act of Parliament. 
 
 Such is the lengthy and elaborate process by which a 
 Bill is transformed into an Act. Nevertheless, a Bill 
 may pass through all its stages in both Houses of 
 Parliament and receive the royal assent in the course 
 of a single day. Rapid law-making of this nature is 
 secured by the suspension of the Standing Orders which 
 regulate procedure in regard to Bills. It is resorted to 
 only in cases of national crisis or disaster. The Bill for 
 the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act in Ireland 
 during the Fenian troubles in 1866, and the Explosives 
 Bill during the dynamite scare in 1883 were passed in a 
 single day. The Standing Orders are also suspended by 
 common agreement towards the end of a Session, in 
 order to wind up business quickly. Owing to the facilities 
 afforded by the telegraph and special trains, the royal 
 assent has frequently been given to a measure within 
 two hours of its third reading by the Lords. The Queen 
 was at Windsor. A telegram that the Bill had passed 
 through all its stages was sent to her Majesty, and by
 
 268 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 arrangement she forthwith despatched a messenger by 
 special train to London with Letters Patent authorising 
 the giving of the royal assent by Commission. 
 
 But the most curious, and certainly the most pic- 
 turesque, scene to be witnessed at Westminster in 
 connection with the passing of Bills is the announce- 
 ment in the House of Lords of the royal assent. The 
 Sovereign is supposed to initiate all legislation. All 
 important public Bills are, as we have seen, brought in 
 by Ministers. They do not seek the consent of the 
 Sovereign before doing so, and yet they are supposed, 
 by the theory of the Constitution, to be acting under 
 commands from the Crown. What amiable fictions 
 meet us at every turn at Westminster ! All statutes 
 open with what is called " the enacting clause," which is 
 as follows : 
 
 Be it enacted by the Queen's most excellent Majesty, 
 by and with the advice and consent of the Lords spiritual 
 and temporal and Commons, and by the authority of the 
 same. 
 
 As a matter of fact, the power of the Crown in regard 
 to legislation has never, since so far back as the reign of 
 Henry VI., been more than a right to express assent or 
 dissent to Bills which have passed both Houses of Parlia- 
 ment. This right, according to the theory of the Con- 
 stitution, still exists. Therefore, before the provisions 
 of any Bill which has passed both Houses of Parliament 
 are declared the law of the land the Bill must be 
 presented to the Queen and receive her royal assent. 
 But Bills are now never laid before the Queen that she 
 may exercise her independent judgment upon them, 
 rejecting some and approving others as she thinks fit.
 
 GETTING A BILL THROUGH PARLIAMENT 269 
 
 If they are laid before her at all, it is a mere formal 
 ceremony, for she could not personally say " Nay "" to 
 any of them. The "veto"" power of the Crown the 
 power of the Sovereign to approve or reject Bills 
 according as she regards them personally has com- 
 pletely lapsed, though constitutional fiction has it that 
 it still exists unimpaired in all its pristine force. The 
 fiction has, however, its uses. It affords to Ministers 
 the opportunity of dropping a Bill even after it has 
 passed beyond the control of both Houses of Parliament. 
 If at the twelfth hour it were found desirable not to 
 place a Bill on the Statute Book, the Sovereign need 
 only say " Nay," on the advice of the Ministers, and the 
 measure would be as dead as if it had been destroyed 
 on a division in the House of Commons or the House 
 of Lords. 
 
 Even in the days of George III., who endeavoured to 
 rule as well as to reign, the giving of the royal assent 
 was a formal matter. Lord Eldon, for many years 
 Lord Chancellor in the first quarter of the century, 
 used to relate that once, when the mind of George III. 
 was not supposed to be very healthy, he went down to 
 Kew to obtain the royal assent to certain measures. 
 He was reading over the titles of the Bills and explain- 
 ing their effects, when the King, interrupting him, said, 
 " You are not acting correctly. You should do one of 
 two things : either bring me down the Bills for my 
 perusal, or say as Thurlow once said to me on a like 
 occasion. Having read several of the Bills, Thurlow 
 stopped and said to me, ' It is all damned nonsense try- 
 ing to make you understand them, and you had better 
 consent to them at once." "" 
 
 "NYhat really happens now is that, when a number of
 
 270 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Bills await the royal assent in the House of Lords, 
 letters Patent are issued under the Great Seal, appoint- 
 ing a Royal Commission, consisting of five peers, to go 
 through the strange and archaic ceremony but pic- 
 turesque withal of approving these Bills on behalf of 
 the Sovereign. 
 
 When the House of Lords meets for this ceremony 
 the five Royal Commissioners sit, as we have seen them 
 sit on other occasions, all in a row, in scarlet robes and 
 three-cornered beaver hats, on a bench beneath the 
 Throne. The centre figure is the Lord Chancellor. At 
 a nod from him " Black Rod " the messenger of the 
 House proceeds to the Lower Chamber to summon the 
 Commons, as both Houses must be present at the cere- 
 mony, and in a few minutes returns with Mr. Speaker, 
 attended by the Serjeant-at-Arms and followed by a 
 crowd of members who congregate at the Bar or over- 
 flow into their galleries. One of the three clerks at the 
 table then reads the Royal Commission, a huge piece of 
 parchment, in which it is set forth, with much circum- 
 locution, that the Queen has commanded "her right 
 trusty and well-beloved councillors' 1 '' naming the five 
 Royal Commissioners to give, on her behalf, assent to 
 certain Bills. 
 
 Then two of the clerks take up positions on either 
 side of the table. The one to the left of the Lord Chan- 
 cellor, who is known as the Clerk of the Crown, has a 
 pile of Bills on the table beside him ; and taking up one, 
 he bows to the Royal Commissioners, reads out its title, 
 bows again, and replaces the Bill on the table. The 
 clerk on the right-hand side, known as the Clerk of Par- 
 liaments, next discharges his duties in the function. 
 He first bows to the Royal Commissioners, then turns
 
 GETTING A BILL THROUGH PARLIAMENT 271 
 
 round and bows to Mr. Speaker and the Commons 
 assembled at the Bar, and announces to them the Royal 
 assent in the French phrase, " La Reyne le veult? or, 
 " The Queen wills it."" And so that Bill has become the 
 law of the land. The Clerk of the Crown again takes 
 up another Bill from the pile on the table, bows to the 
 Royal Commissioners, reads the title of the Bill, bows 
 once more ; and again the Clerk of Parliaments bows 
 first to the Royal Commissioners, then to the Commons, 
 and again declares, " La Reyne le veult^ And so on till 
 the pile of Bills is exhausted. 
 
 There is, however, a change made now and then in 
 the form of words in which the Clerk of Parliaments 
 announces the royal assent. If the measure be a private 
 Bill, such as a Bill empowering a gas, or water, or rail- 
 way company to extend its operations, he says : " Sokt 
 fait comme il est desire ; ~" or should the Bill be one for 
 granting subsidies to the Crown, he says : " La Reyne 
 rcmercie ses bom sujeta, accepte leur benevolence, et ainxi 
 le veult" 
 
 If the Sovereign thought fit to refuse assent to a Bill 
 not because its provisions were repugnant to her 
 personally, but because she was advised to do so by her 
 Ministers the Clerk would say : " La Reyne s'avisera? 
 or, " The Queen will consider it."" Not since 1707, when 
 Queen Anne denied her approval of a " Bill for the 
 Militia of that part of Great Britain called Scotland," 
 has this power of rejection been exercised by the Sove- 
 reign personally. 
 
 The rather ludicrous and incongruous use of Norman- 
 French in this ceremony is a belated survival of the 
 days long, long ago, when the Sovereign of Great 
 Britain and Ireland was supposed to be the ruler also of
 
 272 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMEiNT 
 
 France. The year 1707, in which, as we have seen, the 
 royal prerogative of refusing assent to a Bill was last 
 exercised, was also remarkable for an attempt to estab- 
 lish by legislation the giving of the royal assent to Bills 
 in the English tongue the tongue in which Oliver 
 Cromwell gave his assent to Bills passed during the 
 Commonwealth. A Bill with that object in view was 
 introduced in the House of Lords, passed through all 
 its stages in that Chamber, and had reached its second 
 reading in the House of Commons, when a dissolution 
 of Parliament terminated its career. No attempt was 
 ever afterwards made to revive it. 
 
 An Act comes into operation on the day it receives 
 the royal assent, unless a date is already provided, as is 
 usually done, in the Act itself; and the clerk-assistant 
 'in the House of Lords is accordingly required to 
 endorse on every Act, immediately after its title, the 
 day, the month and the year, the royal assent was given 
 to it. 
 
 Acts of Parliament are not proclaimed or promul- 
 gated in any way. They are printed " by authority " 
 by the Queen's printers which ensures their acceptance 
 as correct in every court of justice ; copies are sent to 
 judges and justices who are the interpreters and dis- 
 pensers of the law and they are engrossed for preserva- 
 tion among the Rolls of Parliament. But that is all 
 that is done in the way of bringing them under the 
 notice of subjects. Nevertheless all subjects are bound 
 to take note of the law. A violation of a statute is not 
 extenuated by a plea of ignorance. The whole nation 
 is, in strict constitutional theory, present within the 
 walls of the Palace of Westminster, when the estates of 
 the realm are engaged in the work of legislation.
 
 GETTING A BILL THROUGH PARLIAMENT 273 
 
 Therefore an Act of Parliament requires no public- 
 notification in the country. Of course, in practice a 
 subject finds it extremely difficult to obtain entrance as 
 a spectator to the Houses of Parliament ; but of that 
 little detail the Constitution takes no account.
 
 274 
 
 CHAPTER XIV 
 "BLACK ROD'S" KNOCK 
 
 " BLACK Rod " is an important and picturesque func- 
 tionary of Parliament. He is at once the policeman of 
 the House of Lords and the Parliamentary messenger 
 of the Sovereign. He executes the warrants issued by 
 the Upper Chamber for the arrest of persons who have 
 been adjudged guilty of a breach of its privileges or a 
 contempt of its dignities. But in these days the curiosity 
 of the public, or their love of sensation, is never piqued 
 by the appearance of " Black Rod "" in the role of a 
 policeman. Indeed, it is seventy years now since a poor 
 trembling wretch stood, in the custody of " Black Rod," 
 at the Bar of the House of Lords, charged with having 
 outraged its awful majesty. He was a tradesman of 
 Westminster. One winter's evening, after he had put 
 up the shutters of his shop, he strolled across Old 
 Palace Yard to hear a debate in the House of Lords. 
 He had with him an umbrella, which he deposited in 
 the charge of one of the doorkeepers before he entered 
 the strangers 1 gallery. He never saw the article again. 
 Another stranger, yielding to a too common weakness 
 of frail humanity, carried it off, while its rightful owner 
 trustful of the might of the Imperial Parliament to 
 protect, at least within its own sacred precincts, the 
 property of its subjects was drinking in political
 
 "BLACK ROD'S" KNOCK 275 
 
 wisdom from the lips, perhaps, of the Duke of 
 Wellington. 
 
 The tradesman of Westminster was naturally indig- 
 nant at the loss of his umbrella, but the expression of 
 his feelings assumed a form highly subversive of the 
 ancient privileges of Parliament. He actually issued a 
 process against the door-keeper of the House of Lords 
 for the recovery of the value of the lost article ! This 
 was more than the House of Lords could stand. One 
 of their door-keepers summoned to appear as a defendant 
 in a court of law ! " Black Rod "" was despatched to 
 arrest the daring shop-keeper, who was brought forth- 
 with to the Bar, and soundly rated by Lord Chancellor 
 Eldon on his presumption in outraging the dignities of 
 the House of Lords, because of the loss of a miserable 
 umbrella. Happily he was not consigned to the Tower. 
 He humbly apologised for his conduct, promised to take 
 no further action against the door-keeper, and, after 
 another severe reprimand, was escorted by "Black Rod 11 
 to Old Palace Yard and there discharged. That was 
 the last public appearance of " Black Rod " as the execu- 
 tive officer of the House of Lords. 
 
 But as the royal messenger, "Black Rod"" is occa- 
 sionally in evidence in both Chambers during the pro- 
 gress of a Session. When the Queen appears in the 
 House of Lords, either personally or by commission, to 
 open Parliament, to give the royal assent to Bills, or to 
 prorogue Parliament three constitutional functions 
 which are controlled in form, if not in substance, by the 
 prerogatives of the Crown the members of both 
 Chambers must be present ; and it is in his capacity as 
 royal messenger that " Black Rod " is deputed on 
 such an occasion to summon the Commons to the House
 
 276 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 of Lords. It is true that in our times the Sovereign is 
 rarely present in person at any of these Parliamentary 
 ceremonies ; but whether her Majesty is personally pre- 
 sent, or represented by Commission, the message which 
 " Black Rod " conveys to the Commons is the mes- 
 sage of the Sovereign. The office to which a salary 
 of ^lOOO per annum is attached, with an assistant called 
 the " Yeoman Usher of the Black Rod " (paid ^500 a 
 year) to discharge some of its limited duties is in the 
 personal gift of the Sovereign, and is invariably be- 
 stowed on an old military or naval officer. 
 
 It would, however, appear from the reception always 
 accorded " Black Rod " by the Commons, that he is not 
 a very welcome visitor to the Lower Chamber. As he 
 walks along the lobby that lies between the Chamber of 
 the Lords and the Chamber of the Commons his approach 
 is heralded by an iron-throated usher shouting, " Black 
 Rod ! Way for Black Rod." But the moment that 
 stentorian cry reaches the ears of the Serjeant-at-Arms 
 in the House of Commons, he springs from his chair, 
 close to the main entrance to the Chamber, and rushing 
 to the open door behind him, shuts it with a most in- 
 hospitable bang, .right in the face of " Black Rod,"" and 
 securely locks and bolts it. The Serjeant-at-Arms then 
 peers out into the lobby through a grated peep-hole, 
 with a wooden slot, fixed in the stout oak door. Pre- 
 sently three faint knocks are heard at the door. They 
 are administered by "Black Rod." The petitionary 
 appeal of this soft, humble " rat-a-tat-tat " no one could 
 resist ; and so, at a nod from the Speaker, the doors are 
 flung open by the Serjeant-at-Arms, and in walks the royal 
 messenger. 
 
 He is not a very formidable looking personage.
 
 "BLACK ROD'S" KNOCK 277 
 
 Arrayed in his official attire a black tunic lavishly 
 slashed with gold embroideries, knee-breeches, silk 
 stockings and silver-buckled shoes he presents, indeed, 
 a rather picturesque appearance ; and there is not the 
 slightest suggestion of aggressiveness, notwithstanding 
 the sword that dangles by his side, and the short ebony 
 rod, adorned with a gold knob, which he carries in his 
 right hand, and from which he derives his curious title. 
 Why, then, this hostile reception given to " Black 
 Rod " ? Why this ignominious shutting of the door of 
 the House of Commons in his inoffensive face ? Why 
 must he wait on the door-mat, and knock three times 
 for admission to the Chamber before it is granted to 
 him ? But really, appearances notwithstanding, no 
 insult, no indignity is meant to the royal messenger. 
 It is an ancient constitutional usage. It is one of many 
 quaint and time-honoured customs still preserved in 
 Parliament which, perhaps, seem meaningless, and even 
 ridiculous nowadays so far are they removed from the 
 realities of things but which in far-off years were of 
 the utmost importance and significance. It is a survival 
 of the times when the House of Commons was not so 
 free and independent, or so sacred from hostile intrusion, 
 as happily it has been now for many years. It is in- 
 tended as a demonstration of the right of the represen- 
 tatives of the people to conduct their deliberations in 
 secret when they deem it necessary ; to close their doors 
 against all comers, and especially against the messengers 
 of monarchs or peers, and a declaration that nobody, 
 high or low, but a duly elected member, dare enter 
 their Chamber without permission, respectfully and even 
 humbly asked, and expressly granted. These three solemn 
 knocks of " Black Rod," therefore, strongly appeal to
 
 278 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 the historical imagination. They recall many momentous 
 Parliamentary incidents in the long and bitter struggle 
 for our Constitutional liberties, and, as they fall upon 
 our ears, even the coldest of us must feel the impulses 
 of our ancestors stirring within us still. 
 
 But it must be confessed that some of our representa- 
 tives fail to realise the true significance of this quaint 
 ceremony. We know how thin the dividing line is 
 between the sublime and the ridiculous ; between tragedy 
 and comedy ; between pathos and bathos ; and the House 
 of Commons being often readier to seize the ludicrous 
 and the humorous, rather than the picturesque and the 
 emotional, side of things, it often happens that the 
 entrance of "Black Rod" is the signal for irreverent 
 laughter and sarcastic remarks. When the door of the 
 House of Commons is opened for the royal messenger, 
 the loud-voiced usher preceding him to the Bar, cries : 
 " Black Rod." The business in hand is at once inter- 
 rupted. Members retain their seats and wear their 
 hats, but the Speaker respectfully rises to receive the 
 message from the Sovereign. " Black Rod " advances 
 slowly up the floor with solemn mien, as if to show that 
 he is becomingly impressed by the dignity and sanctity 
 of the Chamber, and that he at least would not dare to 
 rush in where angels might fear to tread. He further 
 demonstrates the awe with which he is filled by making, 
 during his progress up the floor, three low obeisances to 
 the Chair. On reaching the table, he announces that 
 " The Lords Commissioners desire the immediate atten- 
 dance of members of this honourable House in the 
 House of Peers." When her Majesty is personally pre- 
 sent in the House of Lords, the message which " Black 
 Rod" delivers to the Commons is more peremptorily
 
 "BLACK ROD'S" KNOCK 279 
 
 worded. It runs : " The Queen commands thi.s honour- 
 able House to attend her Majesty immediately in the 
 House of Peers." 
 
 The wording of the message was once the cause of an 
 amusing episode in the House of Commons. General 
 Sir W. Knollys was " Black Rod " at the time. In March 
 1880 he came down to summon the Commons to the 
 House of Lords to hear the royal assent given by 
 Commission to certain Bills. But instead of " desiring " 
 the attendance of members at the House of Lords, he 
 " required " it. Sir George Bowyer, an Irish representa- 
 tive, and apparently a great stickler for Constitutional 
 etiquette, subsequently called the attention of the 
 Speaker to what he described as " the unusual language " 
 used by " Black Hod, 11 which he thought was contrary 
 to established usage and the privileges of the House of 
 Commons. He appealed to the Speaker for a definite 
 ruling that the word should be " desire " and not 
 " require " in order that the objectionable expression 
 used by "Black Rod 1 ' 1 should not become a precedent. 
 The Speaker (Mr. Brand) said that the customary word 
 on such occasions was certainly "desire;" but he appre- 
 hended that the word " require " was only another form 
 of the word " desire," and he therefore would not say 
 that it was an improper expression. Happily perhaps 
 for the good relations between the Estates of the Realm, 
 the more peremptory form, which aroused the indigna- 
 tion of Sir George Bowyer, has not since been used by 
 " Black Rod." 
 
 In our own times " Black Rod " has been the subject of 
 angry discussions in the House of Commons. * Formerly, 
 the royal messenger entered the House during the 
 progress of business, often in the middle of a speech
 
 280 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 which everybody was anxious to hear ; and the repre- 
 sentative on his feet, whoever he was whether Minister 
 or unofficial member had perforce to resume his seat 
 for the quarter of an hour the Speaker was away in the 
 House of Lords. Members of the House of Commons, 
 therefore, complained occasionally of the inconvenience 
 of " this invasion of ' Black Rod,' " as Mr. Labouchere 
 once described the visit of the royal messenger. The 
 more Radical and irreverent section of the House, 
 indeed, assailed the venerable ceremony in a spirit of 
 destructiveness. They argued that the royal assent is 
 nowadays an empty form which might be done away 
 with altogether. That iconoclastic view however found 
 little sympathy. It is true that the royal assent has 
 been shorn of much of the significance it wore in days 
 when its denial was not unknown ; but nevertheless the 
 concurrence of the Sovereign is, under the Constitution, 
 still essential to the validity of an Act of Parliament, 
 and therefore cannot be dispensed with. On the other 
 hand, there was a general desire that the visitation of 
 " Black Rod " should be made at an hour convenient to 
 the House of Commons. The case was hardly met by the 
 reply which it is said the late " Black Rod," Admiral Sir 
 James Drummond, made to a member who remonstrated 
 with him on the untimeliness of his appearances in the 
 Lower Chamber : " I fully understand your feelings on 
 the subject,'" said the gallant sailor, " but you ought to 
 remember that while there are 670 members of Parlia- 
 ment there is only one * Black Rod.' " 
 
 But nothing was done in the matter until the Session 
 of 1890, after Mr. Gladstone had been interrupted in a 
 speech by the advent of the royal messenger. It was 
 on the evening of July 5, of that year, that this historic
 
 "BLACK ROD'S" KNOCK 281 
 
 incident took place. An Irish grievance was under dis- 
 cussion. It was said that a politician had been sent to 
 prison in Ireland for " shadowing the shadow by which 
 he was shadowed,"' or, in other words, for obstructing a 
 police constable who had been directed to keep an eye 
 on his movements. The answer of the Government was 
 that the man had his " legal remedy,' 1 '' if he felt aggrieved. 
 Mr. Gladstone, who was then in Opposition it was 
 during the regime of Mr. Balfour as Chief Secretary for 
 Ireland sprang to his feet, and leaning halfway across 
 the table, and shaking a minatory forefinger at the Irish 
 Attorney-General, proceeded in a voice of deep severity 
 to reprimand that learned gentleman, possibly on his 
 use of the cold jargon of the lawyer in a matter of such 
 importance. But the Grand Old Man never finished 
 even his first sentence. He was interrupted by an ear- 
 splitting cry of " Black Rod " ; and manifestly a little 
 startled he dropped back into his seat again. Of course 
 Mr. Gladstone had too much respect and reverence for 
 ancient procedures and old-time ceremonies of Parlia- 
 ment to have felt annoyed at this abrupt interruption 
 of his remarks ; but his followers especially the Radi- 
 cal and Nationalist wings showed their resentment 
 in the angry and menacing glances they cast at the 
 royal messenger as he walked up the floor, and the loud 
 cheers with which they greeted the sentiment, " Bother 
 the House of Lords,"" which some member ventured to 
 express. 
 
 The incident, however, was not without its amusing 
 side. When the Speaker returned from the House of 
 Lords, he made the customary announcement of what 
 had taken place there. " I have to acquaint the House," 
 said he, "that this House has been to the House of
 
 282 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Peei-s, where it has been announced that her Majesty 
 has been graciously pleased to give by Commission her 
 Royal assent to the Suck Drainage (No. 2) Bill." A 
 roar of ironical laughter went up from all sides of the 
 House. So all the row, the ill-temper, the amusement 
 the interruption of the proceedings of the greatest 
 Legislature in the world, at the moment when its most 
 eloquent and most renowned member was on his feet 
 addressing it; the angry remonstrance of the Opposition ; 
 the solemn march of Mr. Speaker across the corridors to 
 the House of Lords ; the elaborate ceremony, with its 
 antique Norman flavour, in that Chamber ; the solemn 
 walk back of the Speaker again to the House of Commons 
 were caused by the antics of a little insignificant river, 
 with the comic, but appropriate name of Suck, in the 
 county of Galway, whose voracious appetite for cows and 
 hayricks in the winter season, when its waters are rein- 
 forced by the tributes of the hills, the Bill in question 
 was intended to destroy by drainage ! 
 
 Curiously enough, in Mr. William CVBrien's political 
 novel, " When we were Boys " (published in 1889), there 
 is a Chief Secretary, Mr. Jelliland, whose grand specific 
 for the removal of the miseries and discontent of Ireland 
 was the drainage of the river Suck. This, of course, is 
 intended as a piece of sarcasm. It is directed against 
 statesmen, who, in the opinion of the novelist, have- 
 failed to grasp the import and gravity of what is called 
 the Irish question. Well, if the drainage of the Suck 
 has not accomplished the social regeneration of Ireland, 
 it has indirectly led to an important readjustment of the 
 machinery of Parliament. Following the interruption of 
 Mr. Gladstone by the visit of " Black Rod," communica- 
 tions passed between the Lord Chancellor on behalf of
 
 "BLACK ROD'S' 1 KNOCK 283 
 
 the House of Lords, and the Speaker on behalf of the 
 House of Commons, which resulted in an arrangement 
 that in future " her Majesty's faithful Commons " should 
 be summoned to hear the royal assent given to Bills 
 before the commencement of public business in the 
 House of Commons. Three o'clock is the hour at which 
 the Commons meet. The Lords do not assemble till 
 four. But, as a rule, business does not actually begin in 
 the Commons till half-past three ; and as the Lords 
 agreed to meet an hour earlier than usual that is at 
 three o'clock whenever it is necessary to hold a Com- 
 mission for giving the royal assent to Bills, the despatch 
 of" Black Rod " to "desire" the presence of the Commons 
 in the Upper Chamber, is so timed that his knock is now 
 heard at the door of the House of Commons only during 
 the quiet half-hour which follows the opening of that 
 assembly.
 
 284 
 
 CHAPTER XV 
 A NIGHT IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS 
 
 THE chance of spending a long night in the House of 
 Lords does not often occur, for the sittings of the peers 
 are usually very brief. A quarter of an hour is not in- 
 frequently the length of a sitting. Sometimes a sitting 
 may extend to an hour ; on still rarer occasions, when 
 an important subject is under consideration, it may be 
 prolonged till seven o'clock just in time to enable 
 their lordships to get away to dinner and perhaps on 
 two nights of a Session of seven or eight months' 1 dura- 
 tion, the sitting will last till midnight. But it most 
 frequently happens that the newspaper reports of the 
 House of Lords open with the announcement : " The 
 Lord Chancellor took his seat on the Woolsack at 4.15 
 o'clock " ; and after mentioning that some private Bills 
 were brought in, or read a second time, concludes 
 with the line ; " The House adjourned at 4.30 o'clock." 
 The explanation of the brief and intermittent sittings 
 of the hereditary Chamber, is that as the Lords are 
 practically debarred from initiating legislation of an 
 important public- character, it is onlv when the big Bills 
 come up from the Commons that something above un- 
 heroic, but very useful, gas and water measures claims 
 their attention. They therefore may be said to have 
 " got no work to do " for most of the Session, and then
 
 A NIGHT IX THE HOUSE OF LORDS 285 
 
 in its concluding weeks there come tumbling into them 
 from the Lower House numerous Bills which they are 
 expected to dispose of by accepting them with light- 
 ning rapidity. 
 
 But let us suppose that we have been so fortunate as 
 to have obtained an order for admission to the House of 
 Lords on a night when the sitting will last for several 
 hours. We enter the Palace of Westminster by the 
 imposing Gothic doorway in Old Palace Yard, opposite 
 St. Margaret's Church. Passing through the long 
 magnificent hall, known as " St. Stephen's Hall " (the 
 site of the old House of Commons), with its fine marble 
 statues of Hampden, Selden, Chatham, Burke, Pitt, 
 Grattan, and other national heroes of Parliamentary 
 renown, we reach what is called the Central Hall to 
 which the public are admitted to interview members 
 when Parliament is sitting with its tesselated floor, its 
 lofty groined roof, its harmonies of gold and colours, 
 and statues of those later-day statesmen and political 
 leaders, Earl Granville, Sir Stafford Northcote, and 
 Lord John Russell. To our left is the entrance to the 
 House of Commons ; to our right the corridor leading 
 to the House of Lords. Turning, then, to the right, 
 and showing our orders of admission to the vigilant 
 policeman on duty, we pass down the corridor, admiring, 
 on the way, the beautiful historical frescoes with which 
 its walls are embellished, and soon find ourselves in the 
 lobby of the House of Lords. 
 
 As it is not yet the quarter past four o'clock, the 
 hour the House opens, we wait for a few minutes in the 
 lobby to look around us and watch the arrival of the 
 peers. The lobby, like the more famous lobby of the 
 House of Commons, is a fine, commodious, square-shapen
 
 286 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMF.NT 
 
 ante-chamber. The walls, with their unglazed Gothic 
 windows, are decorated to the groined roof, with coloured 
 armorial bearings and other heraldic devices. Those 
 magnificently wrought brass gates, bolted and barred, 
 at the far end of the lobby, guard the entrance to the 
 peers 1 Chamber. The lobby is also used as a cloak- 
 room by the Lords, for note the brass hat and coat 
 stands at either side with a card over each peg contain- 
 the name of a peer. While we wait in the lobby 
 several Lords arrive. They have a private entrance 
 from Old Palace Yard, close to the gigantic equestrian 
 statue of Richard the Lion-hearted ; but evidently most 
 of them prefer to reach their Chamber by the public 
 way which we ourselves traversed. Having divested 
 themselves of their overcoats, with the aid of attendants 
 in evening dress (distinguished, as in the House of 
 Commons, by the broad bron/e chains they wear across 
 their breasts), their lordships disappear through doors 
 leading from the lobby to their private quarters. 
 
 At a quarter past four o'clock the large brass gates 
 are flung open, and at the same time we are directed to 
 the staircase leading to the strangers' 1 gallery. On our 
 way up we see the following warning painted in bold 
 letters on the wall : 
 
 NOTICE. Strangers are cautioned that demonstrations 
 in the Gallery are out of order, and must Hbe treated ac- 
 cordingly. 
 
 Here we are now in the gallery, which consists of six 
 or eight tiers of benches, rising one above the other. 
 Unlike the House of Commons, where the absurd 
 arrangement of different galleries for the sexes prevail, 
 ladies and gentlemen sit here together. Indeed, as the
 
 A NIGHT IX THE HOUSE OF LORDS 287 
 
 night advances we shall notice several other instances of 
 a robust common-sense, or a less stickling for empty 
 forms and etiquette, on the part of the Lords as com- 
 pared with the Commons. 
 
 The Lord Chancellor walks into the Chamber without 
 any ceremony, save that he is attended by the Mace- 
 bearer, by " Black Rod " the Mercury of the House of 
 Lords and by the Pursebearer, who carries in his hand 
 a richly embroidered satchel, which is supposed to, 
 but as a matter of fact does not, contain the Great 
 Seal of England. In the Commons, the advent of the 
 Speaker is, as we have seen, heralded by messengers and 
 policemen shouting in stentorian tones : " Way for the 
 Speaker ; way for the Speaker,"" in the lobbies and 
 corridors through which the right honourable gentleman 
 passes on his way to the House ; and entering the 
 Chamber through a door at its end, he solemnly moves 
 up the floor, attended by the Serjeant-at-Arms, and his 
 chaplain, making, on the way, three low obeisances to 
 the Chair. But the Lord Chancellor slips into the 
 House of Lords, unannounced, from the robing-rooms, 
 immediately behind the Throne, and takes his seat on 
 the Woolsack a crimson lounge or ottoman, of ample 
 dimensions, stuffed with wool (a survival of the time 
 long, long ago when wool was the staple trade of 
 England) on which, behind him, have also been placed 
 the Sachet of the Great Seal the symbol of his power 
 and authority and the mace, which indicates that the 
 House is sitting. The Lord Chancellor, like the 
 Speaker, wears a big wig, the ample wings of which fall 
 down over his shoulders, and a loose, flowing black 
 gown, beneath which you can see his knee-breeches, 
 black silk hose, and low shoes with silver buckles.
 
 288 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 As a rule, no business is done until half-past four 
 o'clock. The mighty and solemn Lord Chancellor during 
 these fifteen minutes relaxes his ponderous strength and 
 brings himself, as it were, into relations with ordinary 
 humanity. He sits " twirling his thumbs,"" smiling 
 blandly at large over the Chamber, or nodding genially to 
 Lords as they arrive, or perhaps a peer joins him familiarly 
 on the Woolsack for a chat. Let us meanwhile inspect 
 the Chamber. It is about 100 feet long ; and probably 
 50 feet wide. Though glowing in gold and colours, 
 the effect is not garish, for the hues of the superb 
 decorations are subdued and harmoniously blended with 
 rare artistic skill. The solemn stillness and the sub- 
 dued light of a cathedral "dim and yellow,"" as Shelley 
 found it at Milan prevail ; and one experiences that 
 sense of reverence which attends a walk through the 
 aisles of some ancient sacred edifice. Everything one 
 sees heightens this impression. The afternoon twi- 
 light falls softly through lofty stained-glass windows, 
 with bright-hued figures of the kings and queens of 
 England from the time of William the Conqueror. 
 As the flattering artist has made them look like saints 
 in their antique garments, and with their sceptres in 
 their hands, they gaze down at us with an other-world 
 air which is most edifying. In niches between the 
 windows are large dark figures of some of the bold, and 
 many of them wicked barons who wrested Magna 
 Charta from King John; and they, too, look like so 
 many patriarchs and prophets. At the end of the Cham- 
 ber there is the imposing canopied Throne, gorgeous in 
 gold, which the Queen occupies when she opens Parlia- 
 ment in person. Above the Throne, set in archways, with 
 elaborate gilt mouldings, are three magnificent frescoes
 
 A NIGHT IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS 289 
 
 depicting incidents in English history. The centre one 
 is " The Baptism of Ethel) jert, 11 and on either side are 
 "Edward III. conferring the Order of the Garter on 
 Ed \vard the Black Prince," and " Henry, Prince of 
 Wales, committed to prison for assaulting Judge Gas- 
 coigne. 11 Behind the strangers 1 gallery are three other 
 frescoes of the spirits that are supposed to reign over 
 the deliberation of the peers " lleligion, 11 " Chivalry,' 1 '' 
 and " Love." 
 
 The Throne is cut off from the Chamber by an orna- 
 mental brass railing. Immediately inside this railing is 
 the Woolsack, occupied by the Lord Chancellor. In 
 front of him are two other crimson lounges, then the 
 table, containing volumes on Parliamentary procedure, 
 and writing materials, with the three clerks in wigs and 
 gowns, sitting at the far end, facing the Lord Chancellor, 
 and with their backs, therefore, turned to the strangers' 1 
 gallery. Then there is a desk for the reporters of the 
 Parliamentary debates, who relieve each other every 
 quarter of an hour. Nearer to the strangers 1 gallery 
 again, in the centre of the floor, are three or four benches 
 facing the Lord Chancellor, which are known as " the 
 cross benches. 1 ' 1 On the first of these benches sit the 
 Prince of Wales, the Duke of York, the Duke of Cam- 
 bridge, and the other peers of royal blood when present 
 in the House. The remaining benches are used by peel's 
 of " cross-bench mind 11 (as Earl Granville once happily 
 described them), who owe no allegiance to either of the 
 two great political parties. Behind " the cross benches, 1 ' 
 and under the strangers 1 gallery, is the place known as 
 " the Bar, 11 where Mr. Speaker and the members of the 
 House of Commons stand when they are summoned by 
 " Black Rod 11 to the House of Lords.
 
 290 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 The main benches, which are upholstered in vivid 
 crimson leather, run up on either side, in five rows from 
 the floor, as in the House of Commons, except that they 
 are divided at each side into sections by two gangways. 
 The walls, to a height of about ten feet, are Jined with 
 an oak framing, artistically carved, and containing shields 
 with the armorial bearings of the various Lord Chan- 
 cellors. Then a light gallery runs round the Chamber, 
 immediately under the windows, for the accommodation 
 of peeresses and the unmarried daughters of peers. 
 Another gallery, just beneath the strangers 1 gallery, is 
 used by journalists; and at either side of the reporters' 1 
 gallery are two other small galleries for members of the 
 House of Commons, who fail to find room at the Bar. 
 The roof of the Chamber is horizontal. It is divided by 
 moulded tiles into compartments, each of which has a 
 coloured heraldic device on an azure ground. Two 
 massive brass candelabra, with elaborate branches, fitted 
 with wax candles, stand at either side behind the Wool- 
 sack. The candles are for ornament, and not for use. 
 The Chamber is illuminated by six clusters of electric 
 lights, dependent from the roof. When these brilliant 
 lights are turned on, the House of Lords, with its broad 
 and lofty proportions, its fretted roof, its crimson 
 benches, its magnificent oak carvings, its stained-glass 
 windows, its frescoes and statues, its majestic Throne, 
 its blaze of gold, its wealth of colours, looks, indeed, a 
 splendid and imposing Chamber. 
 
 There are about five hundred and seventy peers in the 
 House, but the number constantly fluctuates. Unlike the 
 House of Commons, where forty members must be present 
 to " make a House," three peers form a quorum, but if 
 it should appear on a division that thirty lords are not
 
 A NIGHT IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS 291 
 
 in attendance, the question is declared not decided. The 
 two parties cross the floor, as in the House of Commons, 
 on a change of Ministry, the " ins " sitting on the benches 
 to the right of the Lord Chancellor, and the " outs " 
 occupying the benches to his lordship's left. There 
 are also two " front benches,'" with the table between 
 them. The Leader of the House and his colleagues sit 
 on the front bench to the right of the Woolsack, and the 
 Leader of the Opposition and the ex-Ministers on the 
 front bench to the left. The Lords spiritual, however, 
 always occupy the same benches on the Government side 
 of the House, near to the Throne, no matter which 
 party may be in office. The twenty-six spiritual peers 
 the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, and twenty- 
 four bishops are picturesquely distinguished from the 
 Lords temporal by their full and flowing black gowns, 
 and their ample lawn sleeves. A notion still widely 
 prevails among the people that in the House of Lords 
 the peers are always clad in magnificent robes, and that 
 each wears a gold coronet flashing with jewels upon his 
 head. Of course that impression is erroneous. The 
 Lords wear sober suits of customary black, like ordinary 
 mortals, except at the opening of Parliament by the 
 Sovereign, when they appear in scarlet robes, slashed 
 across the breast with stripes of ermine, few or numerous 
 according to the low or high degree of the wearer in the 
 peerage. But the gold coronets, flashing with jewels, are 
 figments of the popular imagination. At least, they are 
 never seen in the House of Lords. The Loi'ds temporal 
 are divided into princes of the royal blood (peers who 
 are near relations to the Sovereign), dukes, marquises, 
 earls, viscounts, and barons titles which take preced- 
 ence in the order given and certain benches are allotted
 
 292 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 to each of these grades of the peerage. However, 
 except when Parliament is opened by the Sovereign, this 
 arrangement of the peers according to rank on the 
 benches is not observed. Their lordships sit indiscrimin- 
 ately on the right or on the left of the Lord Chancellor, 
 according as they belong to the party that is " in '"' or 
 " out." 
 
 Debates in the House of Lords are brief in duration, 
 and are, as a rule, sustained throughout at a higher level 
 of ability than in the House of Commons. Greater and 
 more eloquent speeches are, it is true, made in the re- 
 presentative Chamber ; but there are also long intervals 
 of dull and pointless talk during a debate. In the 
 hereditary Chamber, on the other hand, only the ablest 
 and most distinguished peers take part in a discussion ; 
 and all the speeches impress the listener with the sense 
 that those who deliver them speak because they have 
 really something to say, and not as is too often the 
 case in the House of Commons because they have to say 
 something in order to get their names into the newspapers. 
 Consequently not more than two dozen peers are known 
 by reputation to even the most assiduous readers of the 
 reports of the proceedings in the House of Lords. And 
 how quietly and reposefully debate is conducted here ! To 
 one accustomed to listen to discussions in the House of 
 Commons, where the speeches of the leaders on important 
 occasions are followed with the keenest interest, and 
 punctuated with cheers and counter cheers, with loud- 
 voiced expressions of dissent or approbation, and perhaps 
 with disorderly interruptions or uproarious laughter 
 the gentle and more decorous controversies of the House 
 of Lords, the calm, serene atmosphere of the Chamber, 
 the staid gravity or lounging listlessness of its members,
 
 A NIGHT IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS 293 
 
 the absence of any appearance of concentration, even when 
 great party questions are being discussed, seem strange 
 and unreal. The peers appear to think it bad form to 
 disturb the solemnity of the Chamber by anything louder 
 than an occasional faint and perfectly polite laugh, or 
 a low murmur of " Hear, hear," which does duty for an 
 approving cheer. It is not, indeed, an exhilarating 
 atmosphere up here in the House of Lords, and if Lord 
 Rosebery and Lord Salisbury needed the enthusiastic 
 applause of supporters to nerve them to high oratorical 
 flights, they could never have earned their well-deserved 
 reputations as Parliamentary debaters. 
 
 The difference between the House of Commons and 
 the House of Lords is vividly presented in the diary of 
 the late Earl of Shaftesbury, who had had the advan- 
 tage of many years' 1 experience in the House of Commons 
 as Lord Ashley, before he was called to the Upper 
 Chamber on the death of his father. He took his seat 
 in the House of Lords on June 23, 1851, and on the 
 evening of that day he wrote in his diary : 
 
 It seems no place for me ; a " statue gallery," some say 
 a " dormitory." Full half a dozen peers said to me within 
 as many minutes, " You'll find this very different from the 
 House of Commons. We have no orders, no rules, no 
 sympathies to be stirred." Shall I ever be able to do any- 
 thing ? They are cold, short, and impatient. But God has 
 willed it, and I must, and by His grace, will do my duty. 
 
 He spoke the very next day briefly and with 
 apologies for having addressed their lordships so soon 
 after his call to the House on the second reading of 
 his Bill for the inspection and registration of lodging- 
 houses, which he had carried through all its stages in
 
 294 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 the House of Commons, and was now an unprecedented 
 occurrence to conduct through all its stages in the 
 House of Lords. In the course of the debate which 
 ensued the Marquis of Lansdowne expressed the hope 
 that the Earl of Shaftesbury might pursue in the House 
 of Lords the career of philanthropy and social reform he 
 had followed in the House of Commons. Commenting 
 on this in his diary the earl writes : 
 
 It is, however, a totally different thing and far less stir- 
 I'ing, far less gratifying. Success here is but a shadow of 
 success there, and little can be gained, little attempted 
 . . . One of the most striking effects to me on removal 
 from the House of Commons is my absolute ignorance of 
 the political movements, thoughts, and facts of the day. 
 Everything of importance revolves round the centre of the 
 Commons' House. Unless you be there to see it, hear it, 
 feel it, you get it at second-hand, and then only half. 
 
 Two days later (June 27) he writes : 
 
 The difficulties of the House of Lords seem to thicken 
 as I survey them. Everything must be done between five 
 and half-past six, or you will have no auditory ; conse- 
 quently there is an unseemly scramble for the precedence, 
 and a terrible impatience after you have got it. Yet I 
 have received many expressions, and heard of more, that I 
 should rouse them, and give them business to do, and in 
 some measure "popularise " the House. 
 
 He achieved one success at any rate. On July 8 he 
 made a speech in favour of giving to local authorities 
 powers for the erection of model lodging-houses, which 
 was well received and even cheered. "My surprise 
 knew no bounds," he writes, "I had warmed Nova 
 Zembla ! "
 
 A NIGHT IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS 295 
 
 But it is not alone the difference in the demeanour 
 of their respective members that accentuates the contrast 
 between the two Chambers. In forms of procedure also 
 there is occasionally a wide divergence between the House 
 of Commons and the House of Lords. Notice that the 
 Lord Chancellor has risen to speak, and that he moves 
 away from the Woolsack before opening his lips. There 
 is a special significance in that movement. It is en- 
 j oined by one of the orders of the House, that if the 
 Lord Chancellor intends to speak on any question for 
 himself, and not as the " Mouth of the House,"" he is to 
 go to his own place as a peer. Hence, the Lord Chan- 
 cellor's action in stepping aside from the Woolsack. 
 Although the Lord Chancellor presides over the deliber- 
 ations of the House of Lords, his duties and powers 
 differ widely from those exercised by the Speaker of the 
 House of Commons. The Speaker must be a member 
 of the House of Commons, returned by some consti- 
 tuency in the prescribed manner. The Lord Chancellor 
 need not necessarily be, although he now always is, a 
 peer. Lord Brougham presided over the House of 
 Lords in November 1830, when the patent of his crea- 
 tion as a peer had not yet been issued. In the House 
 of Commons a member speaking, addresses " Mr. 
 Speaker ; " in the House of Lords it is not the Lord 
 Chancellor who is addressed, but the whole House 
 " My Lords." 
 
 The Speaker is the sole judge of all questions of order 
 in the House of Commons ; in the House of Lords such 
 matters, when there is a conflict of opinion, are decided 
 by the whole House, and not by the Lord Chancellor. 
 If several members of the House of Commons rise 
 simultaneously to take part in a debate, the Speaker
 
 206 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 decides who shall speak first by naming one of them. 
 But if two or more peers rise together in the House of 
 Lords, the Lord Chancellor cannot decide who shall first 
 be heard. It is the voice of the House which determines 
 that question, the presiding Lord Chancellor, powerless 
 to interpose, looking silently on at the scene with severe 
 solemnity. 
 
 Happily, etiquette is so strong in the Upper Cham- 
 ber that it rarely happens when the House by cries 
 expresses its desire to hear one of the peers contending 
 for its ear that the others do not give way. But 
 some years ago there was a notable scene involving 
 a party wrangle over the question which of two peers 
 who had risen simultaneously, one from the Liberal 
 benches and the other from the Tory benches, should 
 speak first. Neither noble lord would give way, and to 
 bring the curious situation to an end, Earl Granville 
 moved that the Liberal peer be heard. The House 
 divided on the motion ; and decided by a big majority 
 that the Tory peer should be the first to speak. It 
 is difficult for the average man to understand why 
 the Lord Chancellor should not be able to exercise 
 the authority which is vested in the chairman of everv 
 public meeting of determining the order in which those 
 desirous of taking part in debate shall address the 
 assembly. But there is a subtle constitutional point 
 involved in this apparently ridiculous procedure. All 
 peers are equal as legislators in the House of Lords. 
 No one of them can be vested with authority over the 
 others. Therefore, when a point of order is involved it 
 is the whole House, and not the Lord Chancellor, that 
 must decide the issue. 
 
 If the proceedings become very disorderly, all that the
 
 A NIGHT IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS 297 
 
 procedure of the House provides for the quelling of the 
 disturbance, is the reading by the Clerk on the motion 
 of a peer of two old Standing Orders in relation to as- 
 perity of speech and quarrels in the Chamber. During 
 the tumultuous scene in the Chamber on April 22, 
 18-31 the day Parliament was prorogued with a view 
 to a dissolution on the Reform Bill a peer moved that 
 the Standing Orders be read ; but in the uproar and 
 confusion no heed was paid to the motion. Some angry 
 debates occurred in Committee on the Ballot Bill in 
 1872, and a motion was again made to have the Stand- 
 ing Orders read. The Clerk did read them this time, 
 and when he concluded, the debate was resumed in a 
 more amicable spirit. 
 
 The first Standing Order which was passed so long 
 ago as June 13, 1626, says : 
 
 To prevent misunderstanding, and for avoiding of offen- 
 sive speeches, when matters are debating, either in the 
 House or at Committees, it is for honour sake thought fit 
 and so ordered that all personal, sharp or taxing speeches 
 be forborn, and whosoever answereth another man's speech 
 shall apply his answer to the matter without wrong to the 
 person : and as nothing offensive is to be spoken, so nothing 
 is to be ill taken, if the party that speaks it shall presently 
 make a fair exposition, or clear denial of the words that 
 might bear any ill construction ; and if any offence be given 
 in that kind, as the House itself will be very sensible 
 thereof, so it will sharply censure the offender, and give 
 the party offended a fit reparation and a full satisfaction. 
 
 The second Standing Order, which was passed 
 August 9, 1641, says : 
 
 For avoiding of all mistakes, unkindnesses, or other
 
 298 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 differences which may grow to quarrels, tending to the 
 breach of peace, it is ordered, that if any lord shall con- 
 ceive himself to have received any affront or injury from any 
 other member of the House, either in the Parliament House 
 or at any Committee, or in any of the rooms belonging to the 
 Lords' House of Parliament, he shall appeal to the Lords 
 in Parliament for his reparation, which if he shall not do, 
 but occasion or entertain quarrels, declining the justice of 
 the House, then the lord that shall be found therein delin- 
 quent shall undergo the severe censure of the Lords' 
 House of Parliament. 
 
 Another distinction between the Speaker and the 
 Lord Chancellor is that while the Speaker cannot take 
 part in debate he must not sway the House by argu- 
 ment, as the old order has it the Lord Chancellor, 
 who is always a member of the Cabinet, joins in every 
 important debate in the interest of the Government. 
 The Speaker is debarred from voting in a division ; but 
 the vote of the Lord Chancellor is taken, though 
 he does not pass through the division lobby like the 
 other peers. The Lord Chancellor, however, has no 
 casting vote ; and if the members in a division are equal, 
 the " Non-Contents " or those who support the negative 
 prevail. In the House of Commons, the issue in a like 
 contingency would be decided by the casting vote of the 
 Speaker. 
 
 But the Lord Chancellor has finished his speech, and 
 has returned to his seat on the Woolsack. As no other 
 peer desires to continue the discussion, the Lord Chan- 
 cellor rises to discharge the only function of a chairman 
 which, it seems, comes within his duties the function 
 of " putting the question." This is clone in the same 
 form as in the House of Commons, save that " content "
 
 A NIGHT IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS 299 
 
 is used for " aye " and " non-content " for " no." " As 
 many as are of that opinion say ' content,' " says the 
 Lord Chancellor, " the contrary ' non-content. 1 " A 
 division is challenged on the motion. "The Contents 
 will go to the right of the Throne,"" continues the Lord 
 Chancellor; "and the Non-Contents to the left of 
 the Bar." Tellers are appointed, two on each side, 
 carrying white wands, and the peers pass through the 
 division lobbies just outside the Chamber to have their 
 votes counted and recorded, as in the House of Com- 
 mons. The division occupies between five and ten 
 minutes. When the tellers return to the Chamber, a 
 slip of paper containing the numbers is given by the 
 Clerk to one of the tellers on the winning side, who 
 announces them to be : " Contents, 89 ; Non-Contents, 
 16." "The Contents have it," says the Lord Chan- 
 cellor, and so the motion is carried. In another minute 
 the "Gilded Chamber" is deserted.
 
 300 
 
 CHAPTER XVI 
 
 THE HOUSE OF LORDS AS A COURT OF 
 APPEAL 
 
 THERE is one aspect of the House of Lords with which 
 the public, generally speaking, is unfamiliar, and that 
 is when it sits as the Supreme Court of Appeal from the 
 Courts of Justice of the United Kingdom. The House 
 of Lords is the ultimate resort of the suitor who feels 
 that an injustice has been done him by the decision of 
 any of the law courts. In such a matter its judgment is 
 final and irrevocable. 
 
 Every peer has, in theory, the right to take part in 
 the proceedings of the House of Lords whether it sits as 
 a Court of Appeal or as a branch of the Legislature, 
 but lay peers have long since ceased to interfere in the 
 appellate jurisdiction of the House over the judgments 
 of the law courts. These functions have practically, 
 since the Revolution, been solely discharged by law 
 lords. But by an Act passed in 1824 every lay peer 
 was bound to attend the House when it sat as a Court 
 of Appeal, at least once in a Session, under a penalty of 
 ^50. Three lords constitute a House for judicial as 
 well as for legislative purposes; and the object of the 
 statute in compelling the attendance of lay peers by 
 rotation was to secure a quorum for appellate business. 
 The Court often consisted of the Lord Chancellor or
 
 THE LORDS AS A COURT OF APPEAL 301 
 
 some other law lord and two lay peers, but the decision 
 in the appeal was left entirely to the law lord. The 
 lay peers were simply dumb figures brought in to 
 comply with the Standing Order, which requires the 
 presence of three lords before business can be proceeded 
 with. They were not permitted to take any part in the 
 determination of the matter heard before them. 
 
 It was- not a satisfactory condition of affairs which 
 thus left to one lord the final decision of the important 
 question, whether the court of justice from which the 
 appeal was taken was right or wrong in its judgment. 
 But that was not all. The High Court of Parliament 
 was said to be open to every one who felt aggrieved by 
 the verdict of a law court. There is something noble 
 and inspiring in this idea of Parliament bei ng ever read v 
 to redress any injustice that may have been committed 
 in the administration of the law ; but what a mockery 
 and a delusion it proved to the suitor who on appealing 
 to Parliament to correct the errors in law of the Lord 
 Chancellor in the Court of Chancery, found Parliament 
 represented by the very same judge by whose judgment 
 he felt he was sorely wronged. 
 
 Several unsuccessful attempts were made in recent 
 years to remedy this state of things before a satisfactory 
 solution was found. With a view to strengthening the 
 legal element in the House by increasing the number of 
 lords who had been judges of the High Courts, the 
 Queen, on the advice of Lord Palmerston's Government, 
 in 1856 revived the dignity of life peers which had been 
 long in abeyance, and created Sir John Parke, formerly 
 one of the Barons of the Exchequer, Baron Wensleydale 
 " for and during the term of his natural life/ 1 The 
 House of Lords, however, decided that the title did not
 
 302 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 carry with it the right to sit or vote in the House ; and 
 a hereditary peerage had to be conferred on Baron 
 Wensleydale before he could take part in the hearing of 
 appellate business. 
 
 So matters remained until 1872, when Lord Hather- 
 ley, the Lord Chancellor of Mr. Gladstone's administra- 
 tion, brought in a Bill to abolish the appellate jurisdiction 
 of the Lords, as well as of the Judicial Committee of 
 the Privy Council, which hears appeals from Colonial 
 law courts, and to create instead an Imperial Supreme 
 Court of Appeal. The feeling among the Lords was 
 strongly against any invasion of their ancient privilege 
 to revise on appeal the j udgments of the courts of law, 
 and the Bill consequently had to be withdrawn. But 
 in the following year Lord Sel borne who succeeded to 
 the Woolsack in the same Administration on the resig- 
 nation of Lord Hatherley owing to failing eyesight 
 introduced another Supreme Court of Judicature Bill, 
 which passed both Houses. The Lords had now surren- 
 dered by Act of Parliament their ancient appellate 
 jurisdiction. However, they soon regretted their action, 
 but not too late to recall it. Before the Act could 
 come into operation feeling turned against it, and it was 
 allowed to remain a dead letter. In 1876 Lord Cairns, 
 then the Lord Chancellor of Mr. Disraeli's Administra- 
 tion, introduced the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, which 
 is now in operation. By this statute the appellate juris- 
 diction of the House of Lords was restored, or rather 
 preserved, and its efficiency as a Court of Appeal im- 
 proved. 
 
 The House sitting as a Court of Appeal was formerly 
 constituted, as we have seen, of one law lord and two 
 lay peers. The Act of 1876 provides that at least three
 
 THE LORDS AS A COURT OF APPEAL 303 
 
 law lords shall be present at the hearing and determina- 
 tion of appeals. Law lords are of three kinds : (1) the 
 Lord Chancellor of Great Britain, for the time being ; 
 
 (2) peers of Parliament who have held high judicial 
 office that is, have been Lord Chancellor of Great 
 Britain or Ireland, or a judge of one of the superior 
 courts of England, Ireland, or Scotland ; or a member 
 of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council ; and 
 
 (3) four Lords of Appeal in Ordinary. 
 
 The Lords of Appeal in Ordinary were specially 
 created by the Act to assist the House in the dis- 
 charge of its judicial functions. The qualification 
 required of a Lord of Appeal in Ordinary is that he 
 has held high j udicial office for not less than two years, 
 or that for not less than fifteen years he has been a 
 practising barrister in England or Ireland, or a prac- 
 tising advocate in Scotland. There is a salary of 
 ^6000 a year, and the rank of a baron for life, attached 
 to the office. A Lord of Appeal in Ordinary also 
 receives a writ of summons to sit and vote as a peer in 
 the House of Lords, sitting as a branch of the Legis- 
 lature ; but his dignity as a Lord of Parliament does 
 not descend to his heir. 
 
 The Lord Chancellor, and, in his absence, the senior 
 law lord present, presides when the House sits for the 
 hearing of appeals. Lay peers may attend if they 
 please. Indeed, there is nothing in the Constitution to 
 prevent them from voting when the time comes for the 
 House to decide whether the appeal shall be dismissed, 
 or the decision of the court below reversed. But the 
 hearing of appeals, as well as the decision, is now left 
 entirely to the law lords. 
 
 An appeal to the House of Lords may be made from
 
 304 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 any order or judgment of the Court of Appeal in 
 England, the Court of Appeal in Ireland, or the Court 
 of Session in Scotland, in a civil suit. Before the case 
 has reached any of these courts, it must, of course, have 
 been heard and decided in another tribunal ; so that the 
 question at issue has been the subject of a judgment in 
 at least two courts the court in which the suit origin- 
 ated and the Court of Appeal ere it comes finally 
 before the House of Lords. If the party who has lost 
 in the Court of Appeal has his faith in the justice of 
 his cause still unshaken, or is advised by his counsel 
 that the decision of the court is against the law, he 
 may obtain from the House of Lords a definite, fixed, 
 and final judgment on the legal point at issue. This 
 unquestionable interpretation of the law by the highest 
 legal luminaries of the land is an expensive luxury. 
 The appellant who seeks to have the decision of the 
 court below reversed or varied, must give, as security 
 for costs should the judgment of the House of Lords 
 be against him his recognizance, or personal obligation 
 to the amount of ^500, and the bond of a surety for 
 ^200. The respondent, or the pai'ty who defends the 
 judgment of the Court of Appeal which has been 
 given in his favour is not required to give security for 
 costs, but if the decision of the House is against him, 
 he may be required to bear portion of the expenses of 
 the appellant. 
 
 But giving security for costs is not the only pre- 
 liminary required of the appellant. An appeal to the 
 House of Lords is brought by way of petition. It 
 must be addressed " to the Right Honourable the 
 House of Lords,"" and set forth that it is " the humble 
 petition and appeal " of So-and-so, praying that the
 
 THE LORDS AS A COURT OF APPEAL .305 
 
 judgment in such-and-such a case "may be reviewed 
 Ixjfore her Majesty the Queen in her Court of Parlia- 
 ment, in order that the said court may determine what 
 of right and according to the law and custom of this 
 realm ought to be done in the subject-matter of such 
 appeal." 1 The petition must be printed on parchment, 
 and the reasonableness of its prayer must be certified 
 by two counsel, who have either appeared for the 
 appellant before the Court of Appeal, or propose to 
 plead for him before the House of Lords. Forty copies 
 of the respective cases of the appellant and the re- 
 spondent, which form the subject-matter of the appeal, 
 printed in clear type on quarto sheets, and bound in 
 book form, at the expense of the appellant, must be 
 lodged with the petition in the office of the House of 
 Lords ; and it is also required that ten copies of the 
 book be bound in purple cloth for the use of the law 
 lords. 
 
 The House of Lords sits as a Court of Appeal 
 unaffected by the prorogation or even the dissolution 
 of Parliament on Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays, and 
 Fridays throughout the legal year, if, of course, there 
 is business to be done, from half- past ten in the morn- 
 ing till four in the afternoon. The public are admitted 
 to the House. It is, however, seldom that a visitor, 
 inspired solely by curiosity, makes his way there, and 
 yet it is a very interesting experience. The House of 
 Lords sitting as a Court of Appeal is, in its composi- 
 tion, its procedure, and its environment, utterly unlike 
 any other court of justice in the land. The Lord 
 Chancellor enters the Chamber at half-past ten in his 
 long flowing robe and full-bottomed wig. He is pre- 
 ceded by the Serjeant-at-Arms, bearing the Mace on 
 
 U
 
 306 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 his shoulder, and by the Pursebearer, carrying the 
 gorgeously-embroidered satchel which is supposed to 
 hold the Great Seal, of which the Lord Chancellor is 
 the Lord-keeper. The Lord Chancellor takes his seat 
 on the Woolsack, and the Mace is placed behind him 
 to indicate that the House is sitting. The proceedings 
 of the House always open with devotions. When the 
 House meets for legislative business, prayers for the 
 Queen and for light and leading in the deliberations are 
 recited by one of the bishops. Similar invocations are 
 now read by the Lord Chancellor, and the responses are 
 given by the other law lords. 
 
 But the doors of the Chamber have not yet been 
 opened for the litigants and their counsel. Besides the 
 Lord Chancellor and the law lords, the only persons 
 present at devotions are the Serjeant-at-Arms, one of 
 the three clerks of the House, who takes minutes of 
 its proceedings, orders, and judgments, and the Yeoman 
 Usher of the Black Rod. After prayers, the clerk reads 
 the title of the first case on the list. " Call in the 
 parties in the case,"" says the Lord Chancellor to the 
 Yeoman Usher, and the doors are thereupon thrown 
 open. The lawyers, litigants, and general public 
 assemble at the Bar, which is marked by a low oak 
 partition running across the Chamber immediately inside 
 the portals. In the centre there is a sort of pen, 
 enclosed by a light rail, in which the Speaker stands 
 when the Commons are summoned by " Black Hod " to 
 the House of Lords ; and here the counsel for both the 
 appellant and the respondent and their solicitors in- 
 structing them are accommodated. The Lord Chan- 
 cellor comes down from the Woolsack, when the doors 
 of the Chamber are opened, and takes his seat at a
 
 THE LORDS AS A COURT OF APPEAL 307 
 
 temporary table spread with a scarlet cloth, placed 
 nearer to the Bar than the massive table between the 
 two front benches which is used by the clerks. The 
 other law lords sit on the front benches close to the Bar, 
 each with a small movable table before him containing 
 pens, ink, and paper, and the purple-bound book in 
 which the proofs whereon the rival parties in the suit 
 respectively rely are given in a clear and compact form. 
 Unlike the Lord Chancellor, their lordships are without 
 wigs and gowns, and in ordinary morning attire. 
 
 The case opens at once. No preliminary objections 
 of a technical nature or applications for adjournment 
 are allowed. Such points are previously dealt with by 
 a committee of the House called the Appeal Committee, 
 which is appointed at the opening of every session to 
 relieve the House, sitting as a Court of Appeal, of the 
 work of seeing that the Standing Orders have been 
 complied with by appellants, and of dealing with re- 
 spondents 1 objections to the appeal or applications for 
 an extension of time. There is no bustle and no excite- 
 ment. Gravity, dignity, and decorum - reign supreme. 
 No witnesses are examined, and there is no jury. Brow- 
 beating is therefore unknown in the House of Lords, 
 and dialectic sparring between opposing lawyers would 
 be undignified and ineffectual before the highest legal 
 luminaries in the realm. 
 
 An absolute rule of the House is that only two 
 counsel can be heard on each side. The lawyer address- 
 ing the House stands at the centre of the Bar, and lays 
 down, in a placid, conversational style, the facts of the 
 case, and the points of law on which he relies for a 
 judgment. There is no hurry in this grave and solemn 
 tribunal. Counsel leisurely unfolds the case of his
 
 308 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 client, or supports it, and his long and apparently 
 interminable address is listened to with unwearied 
 patience and the closest attention by the law lords. The 
 calm serenity of the atmosphere of the House, and the 
 cool, dispassionate deliberation of the judges, soothe you, 
 even if you be an anxious and excited party in a case. 
 
 Judgment is not delivered at the close of the argu- 
 ments. Knotty legal problems, or delicate and difficult 
 points of equity, are always involved in these appeals, 
 and plenty of time is therefore taken by their lordships 
 to consider their judgment. When at last their lord- 
 ships have made up their minds, the agents in the case 
 are informed of the day on which the House will deliver 
 its decision. 
 
 The Chamber does not display on the day of judg- 
 ment quite the same aspect that it wore on the day the 
 arguments were heard. The law lords are again sitting 
 on the front benches close to the Bar, with their little 
 tables in front of them ; but the Lord Chancellor is 
 now on the Woolsack. In a moment he rises, and 
 advancing to the Clerk's table, reads from a manu- 
 script his judgment, concluding by moving that the 
 order or verdict appealed from be affirmed, altered, or 
 reversed, as the case may be. He is followed by the 
 other law lords, in the order of precedence, each in like 
 manner reading from a manuscript reasons justifying 
 the decision at which he has arrived. It will be noticed 
 that all begin their addresses with the phrase " My 
 lords." It is another of the fictions of the House that 
 they are not judges delivering judgment in a case, but 
 members of a deliberative assembly stating in debate 
 the reasons why the House should take a certain course 
 on the question before it.
 
 THE LORDS AS A COURT OF APPEAL 309 
 
 When all the law lords have spoken, the question is 
 put in the same form as if the House were sitting for 
 legislative purposes. If the Lord Chancellor has arrived 
 at a decision hostile to the appellant, he says : " The 
 question is that this appeal be dismissed. As many as 
 are of that opinion will say ' content ' ; and of the con- 
 trary opinion ' non-content ' ; " and he adds, " the Con- 
 tents have it."" As a rule, the law lords come to the 
 same conclusion in an appeal. But should there be a 
 difference of opinion, judgment is given according to 
 the views of the majority. The Lord Chancellor finally 
 declares: "The judgment of the House is that this 
 appeal be dismissed, and that the appellant do pay the 
 respondent's costs in the appeal."' 
 
 The judgment thus pronounced is the judgment of 
 the whole House, and it is entered as such on the Lords' 
 journals. It defines and fixes the law. It is the last 
 word on the tangled legal point at issue. The fiat is 
 irrevocable.
 
 310 
 
 CHAPTER XVII 
 THE REPORTERS' GALLERY 
 
 CHARLES GREVILLE, that entertaining gossip in regard to 
 the political and social events of his long day, writing on 
 February 15, 1835, describing the first visit he paid to 
 the Palace of Westminster, after the disastrous fire of 
 1834, says : 
 
 I went yesterday to see the two Houses of Parliament. 
 The old House of Lords (now House of Commons) is very 
 spacious and convenient. For the first time there is a 
 gallery in the House of Commons resei-ved for reporters, 
 which is quite inconsistent with their Standing Orders,, and 
 the prohibition which still in form exists against publishing 
 the debates. It is a sort of public and avowed homage to 
 opinion, and a recognition of the right of the people to 
 know through the medium of the Press all that passes 
 within those walls. 
 
 The history of the evolution of that reporters' gallery 
 of the House of Commons is one of the most interesting 
 chapters in the annals of the British Parliament. One 
 of the Standing Orders of the House declares : " It is a 
 breach of privilege for any person whatever to print or 
 publish in print anything relating to the proceedings in 
 either House.' 1 '' That regulation, which was passed early 
 in the seventeenth century, has never been repealed. It
 
 THE REPORTERS' GALLERY 311 
 
 still remains on the Journals of the House, but it is now 
 as inoperative and ineffectual as if it had been erased 
 out of existence by a solemn resolution of the House. 
 
 Macaulay truly says that the secrecy of Parliamentary 
 debates, which would now be a grievance more intoler- 
 able than shipmonev or the Star Chamber, was, before 
 the Revolution of 1688, inseparably associated with 
 constitutional freedom. It was a precaution devised to 
 protect the patriots against the displeasure of the Court. 
 In 1641 the House, actuated, no doubt, by this praise- 
 worthy motive, passed a revolution making it a breach 
 of privilege for a member to deliver out a copy, or any 
 notes, of anything that was brought into the House, or 
 propounded or agitated there. In the very next year, 
 this resolution was violated by Sir Edward Dearing, a 
 member of the House, who published a collection of 
 speeches. The most dire results followed. The House 
 solemnly declared by resolution that the publication of 
 the book was an outrage on its dignity, and a breach of 
 its privileges. The common hangman was ordered to 
 burn the book publicly, and the offending member was 
 committed to the Tower. 
 
 But, in later times, the feelings of the House against 
 the publication of reports of its proceedings seem to 
 have been based on the assumption that Parliament was 
 above criticism. It was intensely jealous of its authority, 
 and resentful of any popular or outside influence being 
 brought to bear upon it. In 1738, the practice of in- 
 serting accounts of the doings of the House in the news- 
 papers a practice then growing in popular favour 
 with the public was denounced by Mr. Speaker as 
 one which "reflected on the dignity of the House.' 1 '' 
 Another member said that if the publication of such
 
 312 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 reports were not sternly repressed, " Parliament when 
 they did amiss would be talked of with the same free- 
 dom as any other set of men whatever, 1 ' and Sir Robert 
 Walpole declared that if the debates were hawked up 
 and down the streets for sale, the House would be 
 looked upon as the most contemptible legislative 
 assembly on the face of the earth. 
 
 This debate had reference to the Gentleman s Magazine, 
 which made the reporting of Parliamentary proceed- 
 ings one of its main features. Its editor, Edward Cave, 
 was brought to the Bar of the House and condemned to 
 fine and imprisonment for his contumacy. But the 
 reporting of the debates went on nevertheless. The 
 Gentkmans Magazine, so as to evade the Standing 
 Order, adopted the expedient of heading the reports 
 " Debates in the Senate of Great Lilliput," and giving 
 only the first and last letter of a memlrer's name with a 
 
 between. Later on Dr. Samuel Johnson was one 
 
 of the Parliamentary reporters of this magazine, and by 
 his reports made the oratorical reputation of some of the 
 Parliamentarians of the eighteenth century. " The 
 eloquence of Greece and Rome is revived in the British 
 Senate," said Voltaire. The great French philosopher 
 had probably read some of the speeches written by 
 Johnson, in a garret oft' the Strand, without ever having 
 visited Westminster. Johnson also confessed to Boswell, 
 that in the preparation of his Parliamentary reports he 
 " took care that the Whig dogs should not have the best 
 of it," 1 which explains the mystery Sir Robert Walpole 
 declared to the House he found it impossible to unravel. 
 " He had read," he said, " professed debates of the 
 House, wherein all the wit, learning, and argument 
 appeared on one side, and on the other nothing was
 
 THE REPORTERS' GALLERY 313 
 
 shown but what was low, mean, and ridiculous ; and yet, 
 strange to say, the division had gone against the side 
 which, according to the report, had reason and justice to 
 support it. 1 " 1 Though, for the matter of that, the division 
 goes, even in these days, with the big battalions, without 
 any reference to the right or the wrong of the question 
 at issue. 
 
 In the early part of the present century, to go no 
 farther back, a newspaper representative in the House 
 of Commons was looked upon as a pernicious interloper 
 and eavesdropper. It was only by bribing or " tipping " 
 the doorkeepers that an editor of a London daily jour- 
 nal, in the first quarter of the century, was able to 
 obtain a seat for his reporter in the strangers 1 gallery. 
 When inside, the reporter had to take fugitive notes by 
 stealth, for if he were observed from the floor of the 
 House he ran the risk of being expelled, or of being 
 brought by the Serjeant-at-Arms to the Bar, charged 
 with a breach of the Orders of the House against the 
 publication of its proceedings. From this downright 
 aversion and hostility to its proceedings being published, 
 the House, in time, passed to a stage of winking at the 
 process. Then came a tolerant recognition of the pre- 
 sence of reporters in the strangers' 1 galleries, which in due 
 course was followed by official sanction, till the present 
 happv condition of things was reached, when statesmen, 
 leaders of parties, and private members look up to the 
 reporters 1 gallery with wooing eyes. 
 
 A small gallery was, as we learn from Greville, speci- 
 ally provided for reporters in the temporary House of 
 Commons after the fire of 1834. In the new House of 
 Commons the present Chamber which was opened 
 early in the 'fifties, the journalists were also allotted a
 
 314 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 gallery, but it was not till a quarter of a century subse- 
 quently that any accommodation for the transcription of 
 shorthand notes by the reporters was provided in the 
 Palace of Westminster. A reporter after his half-hour 
 or hour " turn " at note-taking, had in those days to 
 rush off to the office in Fleet Street, if he were on a 
 London daily, or to a room in a neighbouring tavern, if 
 he were attached to a provincial corps, to write out his 
 report; and, besides, no refreshments could be obtained 
 at the House. Gradually that unsatisfactory condition 
 of things was improved. One apartment was placed at 
 the disposal of the journalists a small room, in which 
 they were able to obtain a slice of ham or a cut from a 
 cold joint, but in which there was no accommodation for 
 writing. 
 
 Up till 1880 most of the accommodation in the 
 reporters 1 gallery was appropriated by the represen- 
 tatives of the London Press. But in that year the 
 gallery was substantially enlarged, the leading news- 
 papers of the provinces were allowed to send special 
 corps of reporters to the gallery to look after their in- 
 terests, and a fine suite of rooms in the Palace of 
 Westminster was provided for the exclusive accommoda- 
 tion of the two hundred and sixty journalists, reporters, 
 and descriptive writers who are now members of the 
 reporters' 1 gallery. The Parliamentary journalists there- 
 fore are to-day not only tolerated but petted ; they 
 have not only conveniences but comforts, and so, in the 
 intervals between their "turns' 1 '' of work, they can do 
 the dolcefar niente in what, to all intents and purposes, 
 is a large and well-equipped club, which has been hos- 
 pitably placed at their service by Parliament. 
 
 This remarkable change in the relations between the
 
 THE REPORTERS' GALLERY 315 
 
 representatives of the Press and the House of Commons 
 is, of course, entirely due to two causes to the natural 
 desire of the public for news of the doings and sayings 
 of their representatives at Westminster, and to the 
 craving of the representatives to have their speeches 
 reported. And yet the popularity of reports of Parlia- 
 mentary speeches is rather on the wane. Twenty or 
 thirty years ago, speeches delivered in the House of 
 Commons, even by unimportant members, were reported 
 at some length, and Ministers and ex-Ministers were 
 always given absolutely verbatim by the London and the 
 leading provincial daily papers. Now there are only 
 about one hundred of the six hundred and seventy 
 members of the House in whose speeches the public 
 take any interest. The opinions of all the others are 
 considered by most newspapers to be worthy only of a 
 few lines in their Parliamentary reports. In fact, news- 
 paper readers have developed a greater liking for that 
 new departure in journalism the vivid, impressionist, 
 descriptive sketch of the proceedings in the House, 
 which, as a rule, amply satisfies the desires of the public 
 for Parliamentary intelligence ; and if they turn at all 
 to the report, it is only to ascertain more fully what has 
 been said by the leading statesmen, or perhaps to peruse 
 a more detailed account of a "scene,"" or a heated 
 wrangle across the floor of the House. Therefore, 
 whereas formerly nearly all the members of the gallery 
 were reporters, there has been in recent years a large 
 influx of descriptive writers for the London and provin- 
 cial newspapers. 
 
 Admission to the reporters' 1 gallery is obtained only 
 by tickets issued by the Serjeant-at-Arms, in a limited 
 number, to the newspapers whose position and character
 
 316 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 entitle them to representation in the gallery. The 
 tickets are in this form : 
 
 REPORTERS' GALLERY, 
 
 HOUSE OF COMMONS. 
 
 Xot Transferable. 
 SESSION 1896. 
 
 MR. JONES ROBINSON, 
 
 The Watchdog. 
 
 H. D. ERSKINE. 
 
 There are two means of access to the gallery one by 
 a staircase leading from the cloisters in Palace Yard, 
 and the other through St. Stephen's Hall and over the 
 long corridors containing the Committee-rooms. Before 
 reaching the gallery, you pass through a number of 
 rooms resounding with the click, click of several 
 " sounder " telegraph instruments, and the bustle of 
 messenger boys of the news agencies arranging writing 
 materials or "flimsies'" for the reporters, and carrying 
 " copy" to and fro. Two doors one at each end give 
 immediate access to the gallery, which is directly over 
 the Speaker's Chair a capital position, as members 
 addressing the House always speak of course to the 
 Chair, and are therefore facing the reporters in the 
 gallery above. 
 
 On " a big night 11 that is, a night on which there 
 is an important and interesting debate, to be followed at 
 midnight by a critical division the gallery is thronged, 
 and its crowded condition shows that its accommodation 
 falls far short of the demands frequently made upon it. 
 Some of the journalists stand in groups in the corners of
 
 THE REPORTERS' GALLERY 317 
 
 the gallery, and others sit on a bench, provided with a 
 writing-desk or ledge, which runs round the gallery at 
 the back, next to the oak-panelled wall. These men 
 are, for the most part, descriptive writers. They occa- 
 sionally take a note of a forcible or amusing point made 
 by the right hon. gentleman one of the great debaters 
 who is addressing the House, but they more eagerly 
 watch the crowded and excited Chamber below for some 
 incident which will enliven their graphic sketches. The 
 audacity of these gentlemen"^ comments on the pecu- 
 liarities, characteristics and eccentricities of members, 
 in manner, speech and apparel, is sometimes almost 
 sublime. One shudders to think of the fate of the 
 unfortunate editor who would publish Parliamentary 
 sketches of this kind, say in the year 1642. Death 
 would undoubtedly have been the penalty. But it would 
 be no ordinary execution. Some exquisite torture 
 would be invented for the occasion, " something with 
 
 7 O 
 
 boiling oil in it,"" as the " Mikado " would say. 
 
 In front of the gallery, and immediatelv overlooking 
 
 / ' v O 
 
 the Chamber, are about thirty little boxes, occupied by 
 the reporters, who are taking down in shorthand the 
 speech in course of delivery. These boxes are allotted 
 to the leading London and provincial daily papers, each 
 of which maintains a corps of reporters in the gallery, 
 and to the chief news agencies the Press Association 
 and the Central News which supply reports to journals 
 not specially represented in the House. The strength 
 of a corps of reporters varies from five to eight men. 
 The Times, however, never has less than fourteen men ; 
 and as it now supplies the report of the proceedings for 
 " Hansard " (as the official record of the Parliamentary 
 debates is popularly called), its staff' numbers eighteen.
 
 318 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 The reporters of the various corps who are in the boxes 
 are taking what is called " a turn ; " and when the 
 " turn " (usually a quarter of an hour early in the 
 sitting, and curtailed to ten minutes and then to five 
 minutes as the night wanes) is over, they are relieved 
 by other reporters, who go " on " for another fifteen, 
 ten, or five minutes, as the case may be. By this system 
 of " turns " the members of the various staffs follow 
 each other in regular rotation, according to lists pre- 
 pared by the chiefs of the corps. 
 
 His " turn " over, the reporter leaves the gallery for 
 one of the four writing-rooms in that fine suite of 
 apartments devoted to the journalists' 1 exclusive use and 
 benefit, immediately behind the gallery. The walls of 
 the rooms are hung with portraits of famous old Par- 
 liamentary journalists who are now, let us hope, 
 taking their ease in Paradise, and with photographic 
 groups taken at the annual outing and dinner of the 
 gallery men. They are large and comfortable, are well 
 supplied with desks, chairs, ink, pens and stationery, 
 and are illuminated by soft electric lights. In one 
 room there is a useful collection of works of reference, 
 volumes of " Hansard," Blue Books and other Parlia- 
 mentary papers, and another apartment intended for 
 journalists who like to enjoy the fragrant weed during 
 work is a smoking-room and writing-room combined. 
 
 Here, then, the reporters transcribe their shorthand 
 notes into longhand, and the descriptive writers com- 
 pose their light and gossipy sketches. There is a good 
 deal of unavoidable bustle in these rooms. Reporters 
 come and go ; so <do messengers in the uniforms of the 
 news agencies or newspapers, searching for "copy,"" 
 which they carry off' in instalments as it is written to the
 
 THE REPORTERS' GALLERY 319 
 
 newspaper offices in the Strand and Fleet Street ; but 
 the journalists are too much accustomed to turning out 
 "copy" at a high pressure, and amid noise and excite- 
 ment, to be disturbed or distracted by the bustle. 
 
 ^Yhen the reporter has finished the transcription of 
 his quarter-of-an-hour " turn " which occupies him 
 about half an hour, if the speech were made by some 
 unimportant member, and between an hour and an hour 
 and a half if he has to do a "verbatim 1 " of fifteen 
 minutes of Mr. Balfour, Mr. Chaml)erlain, or Sir William 
 Harcourt he is free until his time comes for another 
 " turn."" Meanwhile he may return to the gallery to 
 listen to the debate, or rest himself in one of the 
 recreation-rooms, or go into the dining-room and have 
 his dinner, supplied at reasonable rates by a caterer who 
 receives from Parliament the necessary kitchen accom- 
 modation, a subsidy of 50 on the making of the contract, 
 and a yearly allowance of 9.5 for the renewal of plant. 
 The reporter may repair also to a second smoking-room, 
 where he can enjoy a smoke and a cup of coffee, with a 
 game of chess or draughts, or a chat with colleagues, or 
 the magazines or the daily and weekly papers with which 
 the room is liberally supplied. There is also a cosy tea- 
 room, provided with books and papers ; and, final Iv, 
 there is a bar and buffet, where one, if hard pressed for 
 time, may hurriedly partake of light refreshments. The 
 affairs of the gallery are managed by a committee, 
 elected yearly by the members of the gallery. 
 
 It will be seen, from all this, that the position of 
 the members of the reporters 1 gallery of the House 
 of Commons is very comfortable compared with the lot 
 of their predecessors who, in the old House that was 
 burned down in 1834, were harried by officials, and
 
 320 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 had to scramble for places with mere sightseers in the 
 strangers' 1 gallery. Indeed the gallery has since been 
 elevated to the dignity of an Estate of the Realm. 
 " There are three Estates in Parliament,'" said Macaulay 
 once in a speech in the House of Commons, " but in the 
 reporters 1 gallery yonder there sits a fourth Estate more 
 important far than them all."" This famous declaration 
 is now regarded not as a mere figure of speech, but as the 
 literal truth. The members of the third Estate on the 
 floor of the House are most anxious to stand well with 
 the members of the fourth Estate in the gallery above. 
 Every facility is afforded the reporters for the easy, 
 pleasant, and accurate discharge of their duties. A 
 supply of Parliamentary papers, such as the " Orders of 
 the Day," returns, Bills, amendments, papers, &c., are 
 sent to the gallery by the authorities of the House. 
 Members also are pleased to send up, if requested, 
 their notes, or any quotation they may have used in 
 the course of their speeches. Another instance of the 
 cordial relations between the floor of the House and the 
 gallery, is afforded by the fact that in one of the writing- 
 rooms are to be found the answers to the questions 
 asked at the opening of every sitting, which are kindly 
 supplied by the Ministers themselves. This is a very 
 important boon to the members of the gallery. Question- 
 time sorely tries the brain and hand of the reporter. 
 Ministers have always the answers to questions written 
 out, and as a rule they run through them at such a 
 rapid pace that the deftest pencil-propeller in the 
 gallery often finds it difficult to get the words down on 
 his note-book. Indeed, many a Ministerial answer to an 
 important question would be lost altogether if the manu- 
 script of the reply were not sent up to the gallery.
 
 THE REPORTERS' GALLERY 321 
 
 Visitors to the House may frequently see during the 
 dinner-hour that refuge of third-rate and prosy-talkers 
 an honourable men il)cr on his feet addressing an audience 
 consisting only of the Speaker and the clerks at the 
 table. But the honourable member is not in the least 
 disconcerted by the meagreness of his audience. He has 
 probably sent the manuscript of his speech to the local 
 organ of his constituency, or is aware that the represen- 
 tative of that newspaper is in the gallery over the 
 Speaker's Chair, taking every word of his address. He is 
 sure, anyway, that his speech will be laid before " the 
 free and independent " of his constituency, and why then 
 should he care whether or not his colleagues listen to 
 him ? 
 
 "To be chattered about in the penny Press, is,* 1 says 
 a latter-day philosopher, " the nineteenth-century idea 
 of immortality."" But this hankering after notoriety in 
 the newspapers is most natural in of all people a 
 member of Parliament. Publicity is the breath of his 
 nostrils. If he does not keep his name continually before 
 the eyes of his constituency, an outcry that he is a mere 
 cipher, unable to do anything except to trudge through 
 the division lobbies, will probably be raised against 
 him ; and a more active representative i.e., a man 
 more glib with his tongue will be looked for by the 
 electors. 
 
 The interest with which Disraeli looked out for 
 reports of his speeches in the early years of his Parlia- 
 mentary career is manifest in his letters to his sister. He 
 tells her, from time to time, where to look for reports of 
 his speeches in the House of Commons. " The Times 
 report good " ; " well reported in the Times" are 
 frequently met with. In the course of the Session of 
 
 x
 
 322 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 1839 he delivered what he considered to be a good speech 
 in Committee on a Bill ; but " unfortunately, as generally 
 happens on long Committee nights, there was scarcely a 
 reporter in the gallery."" On August 30, 1848, he writes 
 in reference to a speech he delivered on the 16th of the 
 month : " I have no cause to complain of the reporters. 
 The version of the Times, which now sells 40,000 a day, 
 is almost verbatim, six first-rate shorthand-writers 
 having been employed. The Chronicle is hardly inferior, 
 tho 1 it only sells 4000; the Herald 5000." On July 8,1849, 
 he writes : " My speech last night was at 2.30, and conse- 
 quently not a semblance of a report in the journals." By 
 1851 he had evidently grown more fastidious as to the 
 reports of his speeches. He complains of one report as 
 " incoherent and contradictory nonsense." " It made me 
 blush," he adds, " though I ought to be hardened by this 
 time on such a subject." Sir William Fraser, in his 
 interesting work, " Disraeli and his Day," mentions that 
 once, when discussing with Disraeli after the latter had 
 reached the Premiership whether a verbatim report of 
 all speeches ought to be published in " Hansard," he 
 said to him : " I suppose you look down with Olympian 
 severity on those matters." Disraeli replied : " On the 
 contrary, I feel on the matter acutely. I don't so much 
 object to what they leave out. I am deeply annoyed at 
 what they put in. For example, every one believes that 
 I have said that my views as to the admission of Jews 
 into Parliament are peculiar and mysterious ! Peculiar 
 they are, for obvious reasons ; but at no period of my 
 life was I capable of uttering such arrant nonsense as to 
 say that they are mysterious." 
 
 There is a reporters'* gallery also in the House of 
 Lords, for which separate tickets are issued by the Lord
 
 THE REPORTERS' GALLERY 323 
 
 Great Chamberlain, who exercises jurisdiction over the 
 wing of the Palace of Westminster appropriated to the 
 Lords. The following is a copy of the ticket : 
 
 SESSION 1896. 
 
 AVAILABLE DURING SESSION. 
 
 Admit the Representative of THE WATCHDOG 
 to the Reporters' Ga fiery of the House of 
 
 Lords. A 
 
 ANCASTER. 
 
 B.C. 
 
 The gallery in the Lords is on the same plan as the 
 gallery in the Commons. There are boxes for the 
 reporters in front, and at the back a bench with a ledge 
 for the sketch-writers ; but the accommodation is much 
 smaller, though, on the whole, quite sufficient for the 
 demands made upon it, as the sittings of the Upper 
 Chamber are brief. It is, however, difficult to hear in 
 the reporters' 1 gallery of the Lords. Hence the laconic 
 lines which may be met with occasionally in the news- 
 paper reports : 
 
 Lord Dundreary, who was inaudible in the reporters' 
 gallery, continued the debate. 
 
 or, 
 
 Lord Tomnoddy, who was imperfectly heard, was un- 
 derstood to contend, &c. 
 
 The difficulty of hearing is due to the bad acoustic- 
 properties of the Chamber, and to the situation of the 
 gallery, which is opposite, not over, the Lord Chancellor 
 on the Woolsack, towards whom most of the peers 
 natui'ally turn when they address the House. Now, 
 there is nothing that so exhausts a reporter, mentally
 
 324 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 and physically, as the reporting of a speech which he 
 hears indistinctly, and therefore the journalists are most 
 grateful to Lord Salisbury and Lord Rosebery whose 
 speeches, needless to say, must always be given fully anil 
 most accurately for their considerateness in speaking 
 towards the gallery, as they invariably do, in loud, 
 deliberate, and distinct tones. 
 
 But to the reporters of "The Parliamentary De- 
 bates," who could not, like their confreres on the news- 
 papers, dismiss the speech of an indistinct lord with a 
 line that his remarks were inaudible in the gallery, the 
 difficulty of hearing was a sore trouble for years. At 
 length the complaints of noble lords of being inaccu- 
 rately reported for the "Debates 11 became so pressing that 
 six years ago a Committee was appointed to try to 
 devise means to overcome the difficulty, and after the 
 consideration of various suggestions they decided that a 
 seat on the floor of the House should be provided for 
 the staff of "The Parliamentary Debates." Accordingly, 
 for the past five years the reporter of the "Debates" 1 has 
 sat at a little desk behind the clerks at the table as 
 good a position for hearing as is possible under the cir- 
 cumstances. This innovation has not been followed by 
 any disturbance of the solemn propriety and decorum 
 of the Gilded Chamber, as some peers apprehended, 
 when it was first mooted. Even on nights when a big 
 debate is on such as the debate on the Home Rule 
 Bill of 1893 and the Chamber is crowded to excess, 
 the reporters of " The Parliamentary Debates " noise- 
 lessly pass up and down the floor every quarter of an 
 hour to relieve each other, according to the rotatory 
 system of quarter-hour " turns," and cause no incon- 
 venience whatever.
 
 THE REPORTERS' GALLERY 325 
 
 " Hansard," which from one point of view is a monu- 
 ment to the verbosity of our legislators, is, from the 
 points of view of the politician and the historian, of 
 untold value. " He was a constant student of ' Han- 
 sard,'"' 1 writes Mr. John Morley, M.P., of Richard 
 Cobden, " and for one who seeks for purposes of action 
 and controversy to make himself well versed in the 
 political transactions of the present century, there is no 
 book so well worth the labour of ransacking."" It forms 
 a continuous and unbroken record of our Parliamentary 
 proceedings from the Conquest to the present day, in 
 close on five hundred volumes. The first thirty-six 
 volumes, known as "The Parliamentary History "(which 
 were mainly compiled by William Cobbett), contain all 
 that can be collected of the doings of our legislature 
 from 1066 until 1803. It was not until the second 
 session of the second Imperial Parliament that is, the 
 second Parliament after the Union with Ireland, held in 
 the year 1803, when the hostility of Parliament to the 
 publications of its proceedings was well-nigh exhausted 
 that Mr. T. C. Hansard conceived the happy idea of 
 compiling a report of the debates and proceedings of 
 the two Houses of Parliament, mainly from the various 
 newspapers of the time, and publishing it in volumes, 
 under the title of " Hansard's Debates. 1 " 1 
 
 For fifty -four years " Hansard's Debates "" were pro- 
 duced entirely at the expense of Mr. T. C. Hansard 
 the first who died in 1833 and his son, Mr. T. C. 
 Hansard ; but though Parliament contributed nothing 
 to the undertaking, the subscriptions for the volumes 
 from members of Parliament, newspapers, clubs, and 
 public institutions made it a financial success. In 1857, 
 when the sessional subscription was fixed at five guineas,
 
 326 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 at which it now stands, the Treasury, on the representa- 
 tions of some of the statesmen of the day, directed the 
 Controller of the Stationery Office to suhscribe for one 
 hundred and twenty copies for distribution among the 
 public departments and the colonial legislatures. This 
 first subsidy by Parliament to " Hansard's Debates," 
 continued until 1877, when, on account of many com- 
 plaints that the report was inadequate for the require- 
 ments of the House of Commons, the Treasury entered 
 into an agreement with Mr. Hansard, whereby, in con- 
 sideration of a grant in aid of dPSOOO, he undertook to 
 publish a more extended report. Mr. Hansard then, 
 for the first time, engaged a staff' of reporters to supple- 
 ment the debates compiled as hitherto from various 
 newspapers by reporting the proceedings of the House 
 on Private Bills, in Committee on Public Bills, in Com- 
 mittee of Supply, and debates after midnight, which, 
 chiefly because of their uninteresting character, are 
 briefly reported by the public Press, and were as a con- 
 sequence insufficiently recorded in " Hansard " under the 
 old arrangements. In 1880 the grant in aid was 
 increased to ,4000. But the sessions became so long, 
 and the sittings so protracted, that the publication of 
 the debates for a fixed sum per session was attended 
 with considerable risk to Mr. Hansard the debates 
 made nine volumes in 1881, and ten volumes in 1882 
 and therefore the Treasury in 1882 agreed to provide 
 a subsidy of ,500 for each volume of the " Debates " of 
 not less than nine hundred and sixty pages, provided 
 the total number of volumes published each session 
 exceeded five. This arrangement continued until 1890, 
 when Mr. Hansard sold his goodwill as the publisher of 
 " Hansard's Debates " to a company, which undertook
 
 THE REPORTERS' GALLERY 327 
 
 to bring out the " Debates," without any subsidy from the 
 Government, relying on sales and advertisements for a 
 profit. The undertaking, of course, quickly came to grief. 
 Since then, the work has been done consecutively by 
 two other contractors, and the volumes published under 
 the title of "The Parliamentary Debates'" the old 
 name of " Hansard " having disappeared with the com- 
 pany. Under the new arrangement, at present in exist- 
 ence, Messrs. Waterlow, the Government printers, are 
 the publishers, and the report is furnished by the staff* 
 of the Times, whose extensive daily record of the pro- 
 ceedings in Parliament formed the chief source from 
 which, under the old arrangements, " Hansard's De- 
 bates " were compiled. The reporting staff of the 
 Times turn out two separate and distinct reports one 
 for the Times and the other for "The Parliamentary 
 Debates, 11 so that the official record is not possibly 
 open to the charge of party bias, if there are any people 
 so ignorant of journalistic ethics as still to retain the 
 notion, which had some vogue in the early days of 
 reporting, and which now at least is utterly without 
 foundation, that reporters " cook " their reports of 
 speeches (or that they are " cooked " in the newspaper 
 offices) to suit the political views of the journals in 
 which they appear. 
 
 It seems, indeed, almost incredible that a great and 
 rich nation like ours should have left to chance, until 
 1877 only twenty years ago the reporting of the pro- 
 ceedings of its Parliament, the most important factor 
 iu the making of its history, simply because its Trea- 
 sury grudged the expenditure of a few thousand pounds 
 per annum on the work. Indeed, of all the legislatures 
 of the world, ours, the progenitor of them all, is the
 
 328 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 only one that has not got an official corps of reporters, 
 employed direct by itself, to record its debates and pro- 
 ceedings. The features of the existing arrangements 
 for the production of " The Parliamentary Debates " 
 are that Cabinet Ministers, other members of the 
 Government, and the chief leaders of the Opposition 
 are reported verbatim, and in the first person, or fully 
 in the third person, according to the importance of their 
 speeches ; and that, as regards the speeches of private, 
 or unofficial members, about two-thirds is, as a rule, 
 given in the third person, the stipulation of the con- 
 tract being that no member must be reported at less 
 than one-third. Three days after the delivery of a 
 speech in either House of Parliament, a proof is sent to 
 the member. He is allowed to make verbal corrections, 
 but no correction involving the alteration of what had 
 actually been said is allowed by the editor of the 
 " Debates." An asterisk (*) placed before the name of a 
 member indicates that he has read and passed the proof 
 of his speech. 
 
 The Congressional Record of the United States is 
 conducted on an entirely different system. Every word 
 spoken in both Houses of Congress is not only reported 
 by the official stenographers and published in the 
 Congressional Record, but the latter is also a receptacle 
 into which senators and representatives throw speeches 
 which they have never delivered ! Every member also 
 seems to have a hand in editing it. We frequently read 
 that " Mr. Smith withholds his remarks for revision," or 
 that " Mr. Smith here asked permission of the House to 
 hand his manuscripts to the reporters." Mr. Smith had 
 previously read aloud a small part of his speech to the 
 House. There is a time limit to speeches in Congress,
 
 THE REPORTERS' GALLERY 329 
 
 and consequently incidents like the following are fre- 
 quently to be found in the Record: 
 
 MR. SPEAKER The time of the gentleman from Ohio 
 has expired. 
 
 MR. MOREY Very good, Mr. Speaker, then I will 
 avail myself of the privilege of extending my remarks in 
 the Record. 
 
 And he did, to the extent of several columns, including 
 by way of quotation an entire article from the Forum. 
 Formerly undelivered speeches might be printed in the 
 Record as a matter of course, but " the gentleman from 
 Nebraska" having used this privilege to print and 
 circulate a poem " a little thing of his own,"" which 
 extended to close on twenty pages the right was re- 
 strained. Now a member of Congress has to read at 
 least a portion of his speech, and then ask permission of 
 the Senate or the House " to extend his remarks in the 
 Record," 1 which, however, is rarely if ever refused.
 
 330 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII 
 
 FROM THE LOBBY OF THE HOUSE OF 
 COMMONS 
 
 MANY of my readers will probably need to be told the 
 meaning of " lobbyist." The word has not yet found 
 its way into our dictionaries, but it has been in use for 
 about fifteen years at Westminster and in Fleet Street. 
 It comes from Washington. There lobbyists are male 
 and female agents who work an elaborate system for 
 influencing members of Congress to resist or support the 
 passing of certain Bills affecting private interests. 
 Here lobbyists are journalists who frequent the lobby 
 of the House of Commons, with the permission of the 
 authorities, on the search for political news. They 
 must not be confounded with the occupants of the 
 reporters' 1 gallery. Lobbying and reporting are entirely 
 different functions. The reporter records the speeches 
 delivered in the House of Commons. The lobbyist 
 gathers the political gossip and chatter of irresponsible 
 members, and the official communications of the 
 Government and Opposition, and serves them up in 
 brief, crisp paragraphs, with, perhaps, spicy personal 
 comments, in the "London Letters" of the provincial 
 Press, or in the editorial columns of the London morn- 
 ing journals; and these, probably, do more to make or 
 mar a Parliamentary reputation than the reports or
 
 FROM THE LOBBY OF THE COMMONS 331 
 
 the suppression of speeches in the news columns of the 
 same organs. 
 
 The lobby is the ante-chamber of the House of 
 Commons. It is a handsome square hall, with walls of 
 magnesian limestone of a rather drab colour, embellished 
 with floriated designs, and with stained glass windows. 
 The ceiling is of carved oak, with exquisitely painted 
 devices. The floor is an elaborate tesselated pavement, 
 which has probably been trodden by the feet of more dis- 
 tinguished men and women than have walked the floor 
 of any other hall in the world. In one corner is a refresh- 
 ment bar, in another a post-office, both for the exclusive 
 use of members. There are four massive swing-doors 
 with glass panels, through which members and visitors 
 are continually coming and going while the House is sit- 
 ting. One door opens into a short corridor connecting 
 the lobby with the fine octagonal central hall, to which 
 the public always have admittance ; the opposite door 
 leads directly into the Legislative Chamber; the door 
 to the right admits to the private quarters of members ; 
 and its opposite door to the exit into Palace Yard. 
 
 This, then, is the famous lobby, which, as a rule, is more 
 the centre of political life and activity than the Legislative 
 Chamber itself. Bill after Bill may be introduced in the 
 House, and, judging from the newspaper reports, the work 
 of legislation may be progressing evenly and uneventfully; 
 but to get at the true inwardness of things one must 
 walk the tesselated pavement of the lobby. It is in the 
 lobby that the political events of the day are turned 
 over and discussed from the inside. It is there that you 
 will learn what is going on behind the scenes, the 
 secret moves and counter-moves in the great game which 
 is being fought for place and power by the rival political
 
 332 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 parties ; it is there that you will gather the meaning of 
 the oracular speech which has just been delivered by Sir 
 William Harcourt or Mr. Balfour, of the motion of 
 which Mr. Chamberlain has given notice, and of the 
 objects and aims of the Bill introduced by Mr. Asquith 
 or Mr. John Morley. It is in the lobby that you will 
 hear of the latest developments of the attitude of the 
 Irish, Welsh, or Scotch members towards the Govern- 
 ment or the front Opposition Bench; of the relations 
 between the Parnellites and Anti-Parnellites ; of the 
 intrigues constantly on foot between leaders of parties 
 or groups, and of the cabals which are being formed by 
 discontented and mutinous members. 
 
 The lobby is liveliest before the departure for dinner 
 at seven, and again from ten o'clock till midnight. 
 During these periods of the evening the noise and 
 movement and excitement of the lobby are exhilarating, 
 and to any one who takes a keen interest in politics and 
 in public personages it is the most interesting of places. 
 It is thronged with members, some joking and laughing, 
 others discussing with long faces the fortunes of their 
 cause. But there are others beside members present. 
 Agents of political associations, the men who conduct 
 the campaign in the constituencies, who see that the 
 important work of registration is carefully attended to, 
 and that the local forces are properly organised for the 
 fight in the polling-booths on the day of the election, 
 are also admitted to consult, as occasion requires, with 
 the leaders of their parties. The constant visitor to the 
 lobby is almost certain to see there most of the nota- 
 bilities of the day, besides Chinese, Turkish, Japanese, 
 South African, Indian, and other coloured potentates 
 and plenipotentiaries in all their barbaric splendour.
 
 FROM THE LOBBY OF THE COMMONS 333 
 
 Members of the House of Lords also mix with the 
 throng, and at night ladies in evening costumes add a 
 fresh and piquant charm to the scene. 
 
 Mixing with the various groups, and picking up every 
 crumb of gossip (social as well as political) which they 
 come across, are about thirty lobbyists, who represent 
 the London and the leading provincial daily papers. 
 The average newspaper reader, when he peruses the 
 London Letter in a provincial journal or the column of 
 political notes in a Metropolitan newspaper, and observes 
 the authoritative air with which political announce- 
 ments are made, thinks, no doubt, that the writer is in 
 constant and confidential communication with the lead- 
 ing statesmen. As a matter of fact, these jxjrsonages 
 are very cautions and reticent in discussing with journ- 
 alists the ]x)litical questions of the hour. 
 
 But as of old time with the words that the King of 
 Syria spoke in his bedchamber, so it is now. Every- 
 thing of importance leaks out in one way or another. 
 Even the most secret and sacred of Cabinet matters 
 reaches sooner or later the ears of the ubiquitous and 
 vigilant journalist, to whom nothing is sacred and 
 nothing secret. How or where the leakage takes place 
 it is often impossible to tell. It may be that a member 
 of the Cabinet in an unguarded moment, forgetful of his 
 obligation to keep the proceedings of that august circle 
 inviolable, drops a hint to a particular friend in conver- 
 sation. The friend communicates it to another friend ; 
 it is enlarged and magnified as it passes from ear to ear, 
 till it reaches the lobby, where it is discussed in all its 
 bearings by politicians and journalists ; and finally it is 
 published broadcast in the different newspapers, with 
 more or less amplification, according to the ingenuity of
 
 334 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 the lobbyist or the way in which the intelligence affects 
 the party supported by his journal. If the news is meat 
 and drink for the Conservatives, it is elaborated for all 
 it is worth in Conservative organs, and proportionately 
 discounted and discredited in Liberal journals ; the order 
 of treatment being, of course, reversed when the intelli- 
 gence makes for the good of Liberalism. 
 
 It may be that the lobbyists get wind of the great 
 secret without any obligation of honour having been 
 violated by a member of the Government. To a saga- 
 cious lobbyist gifted with a power of intuition a word, 
 a look, a smile is sufficient to enable him to gauge the 
 drift of things. By shrewd guesses and negative deduc- 
 tions he can set at naught the reticence of Whips 
 and Ministers, and give the readers of his newspaper 
 fairly accurate intelligence of what is going on behind 
 the scenes. 
 
 Some lobbyists do not even draw the line at practical 
 joking when "gravelled for lack of matter. 1 " About 
 ten years ago two strangers were discovered seated on one 
 of the benches below the gangway, on the Opposition side 
 almost under the very chair of the Serjeant-at-Arms, 
 and were, of course, at once removed. But the extra- 
 ordinary part of the affair was that they should have been 
 able to pass the vigilant doorkeepers. Their own state- 
 ment was that they had been told to " go straight on " 
 by some one in authority, and that they had followed his 
 instructions. The fact was that, being on a visit to 
 London from the north, they had been brought into the 
 lobby by their representative, and told to wait there until 
 he got an order to admit them to the House. They were 
 immediately approached by two waggish lobbyists, who 
 directed them to " go straight on into the Chamber,"
 
 FROM THE LOBBY OF THE COMMONS 335 
 
 which they guilelessly did, to the amazement of the 
 jokers, who, of course, imagined that the " strangers " 
 would have been stopped by the doorkeepers. The 
 incident, however, made an interesting paragraph. 
 
 I have also heard that Mr. Balfour has in his day been 
 the victim of a joke of a playful lobbyist. During his 
 tenure of the Irish Secretaryship he received one morn- 
 ing in March (being St. Patrick^ day), at the House of 
 Commons, an oaken octagonal-shaped box about ten 
 inches in length. On the box being opened a bunch of 
 shamrock, with a card bearing the inscription From a 
 sincere admirer, was found inside, and underneath a layer 
 of some white compound through which could plainly 
 be discerned a steel spring. Mr. Balfour is not a timid 
 man ; but the contents of the box were sufficient to 
 excite uncomfortable thoughts of dynamite and infernal 
 machines in the mind of any one. The Chief Secretary, 
 therefore, deemed it well, before further explorations, to 
 send for an official of the Houses of Parliament who is a 
 bit of an analytical chemist ; and on his arrival they 
 both set to work to unravel the mystery in Mr. Balfour's 
 room, much to the terror of the private secretaries, who 
 were momentarily expecting a terrible explosion. For 
 a moment the chemist was puzzled ; but, putting a par- 
 ticle of the compound upon his tongue, he discovered 
 that it was simply sugar impregnated with lemon. On 
 turning the box upside down out rolled an antiquated 
 corkscrew, a spiral spring, and a well-worn nutmeg- 
 grater, and on the bottom was a paper bearing these 
 words : " Buy the whisky yourself ; you can then con- 
 coct the famous lemonade of Ballyhooly."" 
 
 The story of another practical joke, in connection 
 with a celebrated bye-election a few years ago, is still
 
 336 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 current in the lobby. It- was one of those contests of 
 which it is impossible to foretell the result, each side 
 being pretty confident of victory, and each agreeing 
 that the majority in either case would l>e very small. 
 The issue was therefore awaited with great interest. 
 One of the lobbyists arranged with a journalist who was 
 reporting the election for a news agency, to send to the 
 House of Commons, to the Whip of the beaten candi- 
 date's party, a telegram announcing the victory of that 
 candidate as soon as the counting of the votes had 
 reached a stage to make it easy to determine the winner. 
 Accordingly, about eleven o'clock at night, when the 
 result of the election was expected and the lobby was 
 crowded with excited groups of politicians of both 
 parties, Mr. Marjoribanks (the present Lord Tweed - 
 mouth), who was the Chief Whip of the Liberal party, 
 received a telegram, and on reading it cried exultingly, 
 " We have won, we have won ! " He then rushed into 
 the House, followed by cheering Liberals, and announced 
 the glad tidings to Mr. Gladstone, and other leaders of 
 his party. Up jumped the Irish members with charac- 
 teristic enthusiasm, some of them even climbed on to the 
 benches, and, waving hats and handkerchiefs over their 
 heads, roared themselves hoarse in the extravagance of 
 their delight. By a curious coincidence it happened 
 that Mr. Balfour, then Chief Secretary for Ireland, was 
 addressing the House at the moment ; and, as the result 
 of the election was regarded as a repudiation of his 
 Irish policy, the Irish members shouted with all the 
 greater joy. Mr. Balfour was unable to proceed with 
 his speech for a few minutes. It was manifest that the 
 news had depressed him, and he stood silently with his 
 elbow on the table until the storm had spent its force.
 
 FROM THE LOBBY OF THE COMMONS 337 
 
 Suddenly another wild outburst of applause was heard in 
 the lobby. The Irishmen again renewed their cheers, 
 but the spectacle of Sir E. Ashmead-Bartlett, a telegram 
 in his hand and the light of victory blazing in his eyes, 
 rushing up the floor towards the Treasury bench, told 
 them that some strange and startling development had 
 taken place in the situation, and with rather shamefaced 
 looks they resumed their seats. The correct result of the 
 election had arrived ; the Conservative, not the Liberal, 
 was victorious. It was now the turn of the Unionists to 
 cheer, and, as they who cheer last cheer best, there never 
 was heard in the Chamber such wild and uproarious 
 applause and such bursts of mocking laughter. Mr. 
 Balfour resumed his speech in splendid spirits ; but what 
 was more to the lobbyists 1 purpose, they had, thanks to 
 this ingenious little joke, no lack of news that night. 
 
 The hunt for State secrets is not now conducted with 
 the unscrupulousness which marked it many years ago. 
 I have heard of a journalist in the first quarter of the 
 century who for years paid a handsome weekly sum to 
 one of the charmen (the men who sweep out the House 
 of Commons) for the torn scraps of letters and documents 
 with which the floor, close to the Treasury Bench and 
 the front Opposition Bench, is littered at the close of a 
 sitting. He used to go carefully through the scraps, 
 piecing and patching them together, in the hope of 
 lighting upon a State secret or an important item of 
 political news. However he gained very little for his 
 pains. Our leading politicians are more careful of their 
 important private correspondence than this journalist 
 supposed. Most of the letters were appeals for chant v 
 or applications for situations from constituents. I have 
 heard also of a " penny-a-liner " who dogged the foot- 
 
 v
 
 338 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMFAT 
 
 steps of Peel and Wellington from Downing Street to 
 Apsley House, and heard sufficient of their conversation 
 they had just left a Cabinet Council to be able to 
 sell at a big price to a London daily paper a momentous 
 piece of political intelligence. 
 
 There is a story also told in Fleet Street of a plot 
 hatched and executed by a London journalist some 
 time ago, by which the lock of a cabinet in the Home 
 Secretary's office was picked and a most important 
 State document stolen. And it is not very long 
 since the political world was startled by the publi- 
 cation in a London evening paper of a Foreign Office 
 memorandum on certain negotiations with the Russian 
 Government, then occupying public attention, which 
 gave an entirely different aspect to the pour purlers 
 from that in which they were presented by Ministers in 
 both Houses of Parliament. The affair was inquired 
 into by the Foreign Office. It was established that a 
 copying-clerk had got access in some way to the memo- 
 randum and making a copy had sold it to the newspaper. 
 He was, of course, promptly cashiered. How the affair 
 happened has never been publicly disclosed. 
 
 The watch over papers and despatches in our State 
 offices, particularly in the Foreign Office, is most jealous 
 and rigorous, and only the eyes of the highest officials 
 are allowed to alight on them. If copies of an im- 
 portant document are needed for distribution among 
 the members of the Cabinet, it is put into type and 
 printed by an old and confidential compositor who 
 is engaged to work for that purpose alone a small 
 printing office in the Foreign Office. But there is 
 an old saying that the fox must sleep sometimes, 
 and probably an oversight or accident, which occurs
 
 FROM THE LOBBY OF THE COMMONS 339 
 
 once or twice only in a generation, threw the paper into 
 the possession of the unfaithful clerk. Since then the 
 divulging of State secrets by State servants has been 
 made a criminal offence by the Official Secrets Act of 1889. 
 If, however, an important piece of information were 
 brought to a newspaper office it would in some cases be 
 bought without any undue squeamishness as to the means 
 by which it had been procured. All that some journals 
 would concern themselves about in such a transaction 
 is the authenticity of the news. 
 
 But countless are the ways in which State secrets get 
 into the press. While Wellington was engaged in 
 forming his Administration in 1828, Mr. Charles Merries 
 a member of the contemplated Cabinet left a memor- 
 andum containing the names of the new Ministers, and 
 the offices to which they had been appointed, on a 
 writing-table in his library. During his absence from 
 the room, a visitor was ushered in, and observing the 
 memorandum, made a copy and sent it to the Morning- 
 Chronicle. Wellington was very angry over this prema- 
 ture publication of the names of his Ministers. 
 
 I assure you [he wrote to the unhappy Herries greatly 
 exaggerating the effect of the disclosure] that there never 
 was an event, comparatively so trifling in itself, that will 
 produce important consequences on the destinies of this 
 country, as will the premature disclosure in the newspapers 
 of the names of the new-formed Ministry, notwithstanding 
 the precautions and the pains I took to prevent such dis- 
 closure. 
 
 Not many years ago one of the chief permanent 
 officials in Dublin Castle wrote a letter in the coffee- 
 room of a Dublin hotel, and dried it on a virgin sheet
 
 340 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 of white blotting-paper. A person staying in the hotel, 
 going subsequently to the writing-table, was attracted 
 by the impression of large, sprawling characters on the 
 blotting-pad, and to his astonishment was able to read 
 in the signature the name of a well-known Irish Govern- 
 ment official. He tore off the sheet from the pad, 
 brought it to his bedroom, and, with the aid of his 
 mirror, was able to copy the entire letter. It was ad- 
 dressed to another Government official in London, and 
 contained the freest and most audacious criticisms of 
 some Cabinet Ministers who were responsible for the 
 management of Irish affairs. Its publication in cold 
 type in United Ireland made the flesh of many leading 
 Parliamentarians creep. Shortly afterwards the an- 
 nouncement was published that the writer of the epistle 
 had retired from the public service. 
 
 The manner in which the rough draft of the Home 
 Rule Bill of 1893 was put into type at the offices of one 
 of her Majesty ""s printers (it was too big for prompt 
 production by the Foreign Office compositor) and a 
 dozen copies printed for the use of members of the 
 Cabinet only, illustrates the great care that is taken to 
 guard State secrets. The draft copy was cut up so 
 minutely that each compositor got only three lines to 
 *"** set,"" so that he could not form even the haziest of 
 notions as to what the Bill proposed to establish in Ire- 
 land ; and to one only of the most trustworthy overseers 
 in the office was committed the duty of arranging these 
 innumerable lines of type in their consecutive order. 
 When the dozen proofs were "pulled,'" the type was imme- 
 diately broken up and distributed. And yet one of the 
 proofs was found on a writing-table in the library of the 
 Reform Club, before the Cabinet had concluded their
 
 FROM THE LOBBY OF THE COMMONS 341 
 
 deliberations on the Bill ! It had been left there by a 
 Minister after writing a letter. However, that State 
 document was not sent to the press. The finder returned 
 it to the absent-minded Minister. But the incident, 
 nevertheless, helps to explain how the newspapers often 
 get possession of State secrets. 
 
 The Times, which has always been noted for the 
 freshness, fulness, and accuracy of its political informa- 
 tion, has, exclusively, made many momentous political 
 announcements in the course of the present century. In 
 May 1834 it announced the speedy break-up of the great 
 Reform Ministry, then led by Lord Melbourne, on the 
 question of the appropriation of Irish tithes. On May 6 
 of that year the Tithe Commutation Bill, introduced by 
 the Government, was before the House. Mr. Edward 
 Stanley (afterwards Lord Derby) used words tantamount 
 to a declaration on the part of the Ministers not to appro- 
 priate any of the Irish revenues of the Church to secular 
 purposes, but Lord John Russell rose immediately and 
 stated amid the ringing cheers of the O'Connellites 
 and Radicals, that the Government were not pledged to 
 any such policy. Stanley then wrote on a slip of paper 
 the words " Johnny has upset the coach " (a phrase which 
 is now historic) and passed on the note to his colleague, 
 Sir James Graham. That note, or at least the phrase 
 it contained, was published by the Times the next 
 day. It is said that Sir James Graham stuffed the note 
 into his waistcoat pocket, where it was found by his valet, 
 who carried it to the Times. But Graham always main- 
 tained that there was nothing extraordinary in the note, 
 or its contents, reaching Printing House Square, as he 
 passed it on to Lord Althorp (the then leader of the 
 House), and showed it to two or three others, so that
 
 342 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 it was probably known to several before the House 
 adjourned. A few weeks afterwards Stanley, Graham, 
 and other Ministers resigned. 
 
 But more sensational still was the announcement by 
 the Times., on November 15, 1834, that on the clay 
 before, the King (William IV.) had summarily dismissed 
 the Melbourne Administration from office. The news 
 was absolutely unexpected. "Their case is one of rare 
 occurrence,"" says Charles Greville, writing on the event 
 in his Memoirs. " Unceremoniously kicked out not 
 resignation following ineffectual negotiations or baffled 
 attempts at arrangement, but in the plenitude of their 
 fancied strength, and utterly unconscious of danger, 
 they were discarded in the most positive, summary and 
 peremptory manner." Earl Spencer had died and his 
 son, Lord Althorp (the leader of the House of Commons) 
 succeeded to the peerage. On November 14, Melbourne 
 went down to Brighton, where the King was staying, to 
 make arrangements for the necessary changes in the 
 Ministry consequent on the call of Lord Althorp to the 
 House of Lords; but William, who had been for some time 
 anxious for new advisers, took advantage of the oppor- 
 tunity to dismiss the Whigs and to command the Duke 
 of Wellington to form a new Government. This, by the 
 way, is the last and will probably ever remain the last 
 occasion on which a Ministry was dismissed at the mere 
 persona] whim of the Sovereign. Melbourne got back to 
 London late that evening. He communicated the news 
 to none of his colleagues, but sent out summonses for a 
 Cabinet Council next day. However, Brougham (the 
 Lord Chancellor) on his way home from dinner called 
 on Melbourne and was told what had happened. It is 
 said that Melbourne put Brougham under a promise
 
 FROM THE LOBBY OF THE COMMONS 343 
 
 not to say a word about the matter to anybody until 
 the announcement was made to the Cabinet. But 
 Brougham went direct to the Times office, and related 
 the whole affair. He feared, no doubt, that the dis- 
 missal of the Government would be attributed largely 
 to his antics in Scotland a few weeks previously perhaps 
 Melbourne told him so and desiring, probably, to pro- 
 pitiate the Times (which for weeks had been mercilessly 
 attacking him) he brought them this highly sensational 
 and exclusive piece of information, adding : " The 
 Queen has done it all."" The Times, however, writing 
 of the affair next day, said that the downfall of 
 the Government was referable in a great measure to 
 the unbecoming conduct of Brougham as Lord 
 Chancellor. The first news the other members of the 
 Government had of their fate was from the Times that 
 morning. 
 
 Brougham had over-reached himself. He was a 
 man endowed with a mighty intellect, but he did 
 many foolish and questionable things. His action not 
 only failed in securing for himself the favour of the 
 Times ; but it led to disclosures concerning him which 
 made it impossible for him ever again to obtain 
 office in any Government. When the jointure of Queen 
 Adelaide was discussed in Earl Grey's Cabinet, Mr. 
 Charles Grant (Lord Glenelg) stood alone in object- 
 ing that the proposed sum, ^100,000, was too much. 
 The day following at a drawing-room, or a court recep- 
 tion of some sort, he perceived a marked difference in 
 the Queen's manner towards him. He mentioned the 
 matter to Lord Grey ; but the Premier made light of it 
 and said that it was impossible that what had passed in 
 the Cabinet could have reached her Majesty. But after
 
 344 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 the publication in the Times, " The Queen has done it 
 all," her Majesty revealed the fact that positive informa- 
 tion of the proceedings in the Cabinet, in relation to 
 her jointure, had reached her the same evening from 
 Lord Chancellor Brougham. Melbourne, again and 
 again, set Brougham aside when engaged in forming 
 Administrations, and Brougham in revenge continuallv 
 attacked him in the House of Lords. But on one occa- 
 sion Melbourne crushed his brilliant assailant in a single 
 sentence inspired not by invective but by pathos. " My 
 lords," said he, " you have heard the eloquent speech of 
 the noble and learned lord one of the most eloquent 
 he ever delivered in this House ; and I leave your 
 lordships to consider what must be the nature and 
 strength of the objections which prevent any Govern- 
 ment from availing themselves of the services of such 
 a man." 
 
 The announcement made by the Times on December 5, 
 1845, that the Conservative Administration of Sir 
 Robert Peel intended to bring in a Bill for the repeal 
 of the Corn Laws, created one of the most profound 
 political sensations of the century. The Premier had 
 declared only a short time previously that he would 
 stand fast by the Corn Laws, and therefore the announce- 
 ment of the Times was at first regarded as absurd and 
 impossible by supporters of the Government. But in 
 the course of time it turned out to be true. There 
 was naturally much speculation at the time as to how 
 the Times got possession of that important and sensa- 
 tional State secret. A popular version which, though 
 it is utterly unfounded, is still told is that Sidney Her- 
 bert, a young and handsome member of the Government 
 he whose statue by Foley looks down so benignly on
 
 FROM THE LOBBY OF THE COMMONS 345 
 
 Wayfarers outside the War Office in Pall Mall had 
 been beguiled of the secret by Mrs. Norton, a beautiful, 
 and gifted lady and a prominent figure at the time in 
 political as well as in literary and social circles. At the 
 great divorce trial of Norton v. Lord Melbourne (which 
 ended in a verdict for the respondent) a letter from the 
 Hon. Mrs. Norton was read for the purpose of proving 
 that Lord Melbourne's presence in Mrs. Norton's house 
 made the children familiar with the phrases of public 
 life. Mrs. Norton stated that after luncheon her little 
 boy started from the table, and asked her "May I 
 resign ?"" She asked him what he meant, and received 
 this answer: "I want, of course, to go out. Is 
 not to ' resign ' the same as to 'go out ' ? " It is said 
 that on the evening after the Cabinet Council, at 
 which the momentous decision in regard to the Corn 
 Laws was arrived at, Sidney Herbert dined tete-a-tete 
 with Mrs. Norton, and that under the influence of her 
 beauty and cleverness divulged the secret. Unknown to 
 her friend, she at once drove, the story goes, to the 
 Times office, and told the news to the editor, who thought 
 the information well worth the cheque for 500 which 
 he gave her. But the Times really got the informa- 
 tion from Lord Aberdeen, a member of the Cabinet. 
 Aberdeen was Foreign Secretary. His most earnest 
 desire was to settle a dispute then in progress with 
 the United States known as " the Oregon affair," and 
 as he knew that nothing would tend more to the 
 spread of pacific views in a corn-growing country than 
 the news that the Corn Laws were going to be re- 
 pealed, he sent the announcement for publication to 
 the Times on the morning the American mails were 
 despatched.
 
 346 THE BOOK OF PAR LI AM FAT 
 
 On Monday, March 13, 1845, questions were asked in 
 both Houses of Parliament about an article in the Time* 
 of the previous Saturday containing most important in- 
 formation that had not been laid before Parliament 
 in reference to the negotiations then in progress between 
 this country and Russia, which ultimately ended in the 
 Crimean War. Some time before the Journal of 
 St. Petersburg- contained a semi-official statement com- 
 plaining of language used by Lord John Russell (Secre- 
 tary for Foreign Affairs) in reference to the Emperor of 
 Russia. These expressions of distrust of Russia by the 
 English Minister were, the Journal said, inexcusable, as 
 communications of a most friendly character, showing 
 that the Emperor Nicholas had no designs on Turkey, 
 had passed between the two Governments. The T'vmts 
 published this article, but denied that it accurately 
 described the relations between the two Governments, 
 and then went on to make the momentous announcement 
 that an ultimatum had actually been sent to Russia. 
 
 I must say in passing [said Lord Derby, who asked for 
 information in the House of Lords] that this is not the first 
 occasion upon which the Times newspaper, within the 
 course of the last few months, has professed to be in pos- 
 session, and has proved to be in possession, of secret and 
 exclusive information, which ought to have been known 
 only to the Cabinet, and has also had possession of or 
 access to papers which have been refused and are still 
 refused to the two Houses of Parliament. 
 
 Lord Aberdeen, who was then a member of a Liberal 
 Cabinet, hotly denied the insinuation that State secrets 
 had been communicated by Ministers to the Times. He 
 admitted that a scandalous betrayal of duty had been
 
 FROM THE LOBBY OF THE COMMONS 347 
 
 committed in this instance, and hinted that the culprit 
 was a clerk in the Foreign Office, who had just left the 
 service, and who had been appointed by Lord Malmes- 
 bury, the Foreign Secretary of the previous Tory Govern- 
 ment. The Times next morning asserted that it had 
 not got its information from a clerk. It treated with 
 scorn the notion that it would accept information on 
 such a matter from a clerk, or from even a subordinate 
 member of the Government, or from anybody in fact but 
 those who knew of it first hand. Lord Malmesbury 
 brought up the subject again in the House of Lords. 
 He stated that the clerk to whom Lord Aberdeen had 
 evidently referred had not been dismissed ; but had left 
 for the very excellent and pleasant reason that he had 
 married a lady of considerable fortune ; and he read a 
 letter from the gentleman positively denying that he 
 had ever made known the nature of any document given 
 him to copy. Lord Aberdeen fully accepted the denial, 
 and expressed his deep regret for having made the im- 
 putation. 
 
 I would advise the noble lord [said Lord Malmesbury, in 
 conclusion], if anything of the kind occurs again, not to 
 rashly lay the blame on the youngest or most insignificant 
 of the department, but to remember the answer given by 
 Sancho Panza to his master, Don Quixote, upon an occa- 
 sion when accused of an indiscretion ' Your worship will 
 recollect that a cask may leak at the top as well as at the 
 bottom.' 
 
 Greville states, in his " Memoirs, 11 that it was believed 
 at the time that Lord Aberdeen himself made the com- 
 munication to his friend Delane, the then great editor of 
 the Times.
 
 348 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 All this shows that the work of the lobbyist is not, as 
 some people may suppose, mere speculation and inven- 
 tion. Several of them have exclusive access to trust- 
 worthy private sources of information for which they pay 
 handsomely. The success of the lobbyist depends, in a 
 great measure, on the position and influence of the 
 journal he represents. To the Parliamentary representa- 
 tive of a great London paper nothing is denied but that 
 which it is injudicious to publish. Ministers, Whips, 
 and leaders of parties give him information which they 
 would not give to the representative of a journal of less 
 importance in the provinces. But there are sources of 
 information open to all lobbyists, however great or how- 
 ever small may be the newspapers they represent. In 
 addition to the common gossip of the lobby, which often 
 yields abundant material for political notes, there are 
 Parliamentary papers of various kinds, such as Blue- 
 Books, reports of Committees, copies of new Bills, 
 intended amendments to Bills, resolutions, motions, &c., 
 out of which interesting paragraphs can be made. The 
 members are, as a rule, very obliging to the lobbyists. 
 They all make it their business to see that the represen- 
 tative of their own local organ is not stranded in any 
 matter. The cynical may say they have axes of their own 
 to grind, and no doubt it is essential to members of 
 Parliament that they should stand well with their local 
 Press. In many cases indeed their very existence as 
 members depends upon it. " I absolutely disregard all 
 Press criticisms, except those which come from my own 
 local paper, The SkiUbereen Eagle" said an Irish mem- 
 ber once in the House of Commons, and that is the 
 sentiment of most members of Parliament. Therefore 
 it is that in these days, when the craze for notoriety is
 
 FROM THE LOBBY OF THE COMMONS 349 
 
 so widespread, and the appetite for news so insatiable, 
 the journalist is a welcome visitor to the lobby of the 
 House of Commons, where so late as the time of our 
 grandfathers, when the inquisitiveness of newspapers was 
 regarded as a gross impertinence, he was treated as little 
 better than an eavesdropper and interloper.
 
 350 
 
 CHAPTER XIX 
 THE QUEEN'S REPORTER 
 
 IN the private library of the Queen in Buckingham 
 Palace which has been, since her accession to the 
 throne in 1837, the metropolitan abode of her Majesty 
 there are several shelves of volumes, which stand out 
 prominently from the other books in the collection by 
 reason of the uniformity of their substantial and yet 
 tasteful bindings. The gilt lettering on the broad backs 
 of the volumes shows that they are devoted to the subject 
 of Parliament. The first volume of the series, for 
 instance, bears the following title : 
 
 FIRST 
 PARLIAMENT 
 
 OF 
 
 VICTORIA 
 
 SESSION I 
 1837-38. 
 
 And so on through the series to the last volume, which 
 is inscribed, " Fourteenth Parliament of Victoria. 
 Session II., 1896." 
 
 A closer inspection of the volumes would show that 
 they are composed, not of printed matter, but of manu- 
 scripts. They are, in fact, descriptions of scenes and 
 incidents in the House of Commons during the long
 
 THE QUEEN'S REPORTER 351 
 
 reign of the Queen from 1837 to 1896 written by the 
 various eminent statesmen who have been Leaders of the 
 House within that period. It is not generally known 
 that when Parliament is sitting the Queen receives, 
 morning after morning, a special account of the proceed- 
 ings of the House of Commons the night before, from 
 the Leader of the House. This report must not be 
 confounded with the brief summary of the proceed- 
 ings telegraphed by the Vice-Chamberlain of the 
 Household (a minor member of the Government), 
 every three hours during the sitting of the House, to 
 Windsor, Osborne, or Balmoral, whichever of the palaces 
 her Majesty may be occupying at the time. The report 
 is always written by the Leader of the House ; so that 
 the writers of these volumes in the library of Bucking- 
 ham Palace, are Viscount Melbourne, Sir Robert Peel, 
 Lord John Russell, Lord Palmerston, Mr. Disraeli, Mr. 
 Gladstone, Sir Michael Hicks-Beach, Lord Randolph 
 Churchill, Mr. W. H. Smith, Mr. Arthur Balfour, and 
 Sir William Harcourt, all of whom have in turn filled 
 the post of " Queen's Reporter.' 1 '' 
 
 What splendid newspaper " copy " there is in those 
 volumes! What would not the leading daily journals 
 give for descriptions of some of the events of the last 
 Parliament, and of this Parliament, from the pens of Mr. 
 Arthur Balfour, Mr. Gladstone, and Sir William Har- 
 court ! When these reports are published, as no doubt 
 they will be in years to come, they will make most 
 interesting reading, while their value and importance as 
 contributions to the Parliamentary and political history 
 of the Victorian era can hardly be exaggerated. 
 
 Some of the Leaders of the House may have contented 
 themselves with sending the Queen a mere digest of the
 
 352 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 business done during the sitting. But that is hardly 
 probable. They would naturally aim at making their 
 reports bright and interesting, and at conveying to her 
 Majesty particulars which she would not find in the 
 average newspaper Parliamentary report. At any rale, 
 the few glimpses we have got of the contents of these 
 volumes show that Lord Palmerston and Mr. Disraeli, at 
 least, imitating " Our London Correspondent "" of the 
 provincial newspapers, sent pictorial sketches of scenes 
 and incidents enacted in the House during the night, 
 and indulged in humorous and critical comment on the 
 speeches and personal peculiarities of members who took 
 part in the debates. Only two extracts from this long 
 series of bulky volumes have as yet been published. Sir 
 Theodore Martin was allowed the privilege of going 
 through the reports when writing the " Life of the 
 Prince Consort," but he has made a very meagre use of 
 them in that work, perhaps by direction of the Queen. 
 
 Here, however, is an extract from a report sent by 
 Lord Palmerston to the Queen on August 13, 1860 : 
 
 Members are leaving town ; but the tiresome ones, who 
 have no occupation of their own, and no chance of seeing 
 their names in the newspapers when Parliament is up, 
 remain to obstruct and delay by talking. The Speaker, 
 who has not been quite well, grows as impatient as any 
 official who has hired a grousing moor and cannot get to 
 it; and a few nights ago, when a tiresome orator got up 
 to speak just as the end of the debate had been expected, 
 the Speaker cried out, ' Oh, oh ! ' in chorus with the rest 
 of the House. 
 
 The other extract is from the pen of Mr. Disraeli, 
 who, in 1858-59, enjoyed a brief term of office for the
 
 THE QUEEN'S REPORTER 353 
 
 second time, as Chancellor of the Exchequer and Leader 
 of the House of Commons, in the second Derby Adminis- 
 tration. In 1859 the Government introduced n Reform 
 Bill, and were defeated on an amendment to the Bill 
 moved by Lord John Russell. On the night of the 22nd 
 of March, two important speeches on the amendment 
 Mere delivered one against the Bill of the Government 
 by Sir Edward Bulwer Lytton, and the other in its 
 support by Sir Hugh Cairns, the Solicitor-General. 
 Mr. Disraeli thus describes the speeches in his report to 
 the Queen : 
 
 A night of immense power and excitement. Two of 
 the greatest speeches ever delivered in Parliament by 
 Sir Edward Lytton and the Solicitor-General .... Both 
 spoke in a crowded House ; one before dinner, the other 
 concluding, just down. Never was a greater contrast 
 between two orators, resembling each other in nothing 
 but their excellence. Deaf, fantastic, modulating his 
 voice with difficulty at first almost an object of ridicule to 
 the superficial Lytton occasionally reached even the sub- 
 lime, and perfectly enchained his audience. His descrip- 
 tion of the English Constitution ; his analysis of democracy 
 as rich and more powerful than Burke. Sir Hugh Cairns 
 devoted an hour to a reply to Lord John's Resolutions, and 
 to a vindication of the Government Bill, which charmed 
 every one by its lucidity and controlled every one by its 
 logic. When he had, in the most masterly manner, and 
 with a concinnity which none can equal, closed the busi- 
 ness part of his address, he directed himself to the 
 political portion of the theme, and, having literally de- 
 molished the mover of the amendment, sat down amid 
 universal cheers. 
 
 The Sovereign is the head of Parliament. , It is the 
 
 7.
 
 354 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Sovereign that calls it into existence to advise him or 
 her in the government of the realm. In theory, the 
 Sovereign presides over all its deliberations. The actual 
 presence of the Sovereign in Parliament on any but a 
 ceremonial occasion would, however, be now regarded as 
 unconstitutional. The Sovereign cannot appear in the 
 House of Commons at any time. In the House of 
 Lords the King or Queen can only come in state to 
 exercise the royal prerogatives of opening or proroguing 
 Parliament, or of giving assent to Bills that have passed 
 both Houses. But in early times it was customary for 
 the King to be present in the House of Lords, and to 
 take an active part in its proceedings. Later on, the 
 Sovereign visited the House of Lords merely as a 
 spectator. Charles II. found a few hours spent in that 
 Chamber a pleasant interlude to the gaieties of White- 
 hall. "It is as good as a play," said the Merrie 
 Monarch. 
 
 On the first occasion that Charles unexpectedly 
 entered the Upper Chamber the peers were in Com- 
 mittee, and the House immediately resumed to ascertain 
 the object of this unceremonious visit of the Sovereign. 
 He told them he meant to follow the example of his 
 ancestors, who often attended the debates in the House 
 of Lords. But their lordships need not be disconcerted 
 by his royal presence; let them go on with business; 
 and he was kind enough to say also that they might 
 wear their hats. The novelty of the King's presence 
 must have quickly worn off, for, according to the Lords' 1 
 Journals, Charles reprimanded their lordships " for their 
 very great disorders in debate," on January 26th, 1670. 
 
 James II., William III., and Anne were also fre- 
 quently present at the debates of the House of Lords.
 
 THE QUEEN'S REPORTER 355 
 
 But the peers grew jealous of the presence of the 
 Sovereign, or found that on the whole it was a restraint 
 on the freedom of debate. They were accordingly very 
 glad when the custom was discontinued by George I., 
 on his accession to the throne, in 1714, for the very 
 good reason that, as he did not know a word of English, 
 the discussions could not have afforded him much in- 
 struction or amusement. The last occasion on which a 
 Sovereign was present at the debates in the House of 
 Lords was on January 12th, 1710, when Queen Anne 
 came down to hear the peers on the subject of the war 
 with Spain. Since then no king or queen has been 
 present in the Upper Chamber save at the opening or 
 proroguing of Parliament. 
 
 The only king who ever entered the House of 
 Commons was Charles I., and the visit of that foolish 
 and impulsive monarch proved too rash and ruinous an 
 experiment to find imitators among his royal successors. 
 The occasion was the memorable January 4, 1642, 
 when he sallied out of Whitehall, and, leaving 300 
 armed men in A\ r estminster Hall, suddenly entered the 
 House to seize the five members Hampden, Pym, 
 Holies, Strode, and Hazlerig who, along with Lord 
 Kimbolton, had been the day before impeached for high 
 treason in the name of the King at the Bar of the 
 House of Lords. The peers, nevertheless, refused to 
 order the accused members to be taken into custody ; 
 and now Charles had come to effect their capture 
 himself. He strode up to the Chair, wearing his hat, 
 and addressing Mr. Speaker Lenthall, said, " By your 
 leave, Mr. Speaker, I must borrow your chair a little." 
 Lenthall came down and stood by the table, as the King 
 from the dais looked around to see if the five who dared
 
 356 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 to dispute his royal will were present. Hut, as he said 
 himself, " the birds were flown " ; and so, commanding 
 Lenthall to " send them unto him as soon as they 
 returned hither," he left the Chamber, followed by a 
 shout of " Privilege, privilege " from the incensed 
 members. Curiously enough, this was the House of 
 Commons, known as "the Long Parliament," which 
 seven years afterwards consigned to execution the Kino 
 who thus so unceremoniously intruded upon their 
 deliberations. 
 
 The Commons' Journal deals in a very perfunctory 
 fashion with this historic episode. " His Majesty, 1 ' 1 it 
 states, "came into the House and took Mr. Speaker's 
 chair : ' Gentlemen, I am sorry to have this occasion to 
 come unto you,' 1 '" and then the record breaks off' 
 abruptly. But as the King stood on the dai's haranguing 
 the Commons, he observed John Rushworth, the assistant 
 clerk, who sat at the table beneath him, apparently 
 taking down his words in strange characters. What 
 could those curious dots and strokes and curves mean ? 
 Immediately after he left the Chamber the King made 
 inquiries to satisfy his curiosity, and on being informed 
 that Rushworth wrote a system of shorthand, he at 
 once sent "Black Rod" 111 for the clerk and commanded him 
 to give him a copy of his speech. Rushworth in vain 
 represented the danger he ran of punishment by the 
 Commons if he reported to his Majesty anything that 
 had been spoken in the House. " I do not ask you to 
 tell me what was said by any member of the House, but 
 what I said myself,' 1 '' said the King. So the clerk wrote 
 out the speech, and his Majesty got it printed and cir- 
 culated next morning. John Rushworth may, therefore, 
 be described as the first of the Sovereign's reporters.
 
 THE QUEEN'S REPORTER 357 
 
 Charles I., then, was the only Sovereign who ever 
 crossed the threshold of the House of Commons. It is, 
 indeed, a curious circumstance that the Queen has 
 never seen her "faithful Commons 1 ' 1 in session, although 
 she has been on the throne for sixty years. She is 
 denied a spectacle that may be witnessed by the 
 humblest subject of her own sex. It can hardly be said 
 with truth in these times that the presence of the 
 Sovereign in the House would influence the result of a 
 debate. Her Majesty could, indeed, be an unobserved 
 spectator behind the grille of the ladies" gallery. 
 Neither does the old theory that the presence of the 
 Sovereign would be a violation of the freedom and 
 secrecy of the debates hold good in these days of uni- 
 versal newspaper reporting. The Queen may read, every 
 morning of the Session, a full report of the previous 
 night's proceedings in the House of Commons, and 
 graphic descriptions of any scenes or incidents that may 
 have marked their progress. But the fact nevertheless 
 remains that the Queen is by a theory of the Constitu- 
 tion prohibited from entering the House of Commons. 
 
 A feeling of resentment against the presence of a 
 member of the Royal Family in the House of Commons 
 was once manifested in an extraordinary fashion in our 
 own times. On January 27, 1846, the Prince Consort was 
 present as a spectator in the peers' 1 gallery of the House 
 of Commons to hear the opening of the debate on Sir 
 Kobert PeePs resolution for leave to introduce a Bill for 
 the abolition of the Corn Laws. A few nights sub- 
 sequently, and before the debate had terminated, Lord 
 George Bentinck, who was a vehement opponent of the 
 resolution, charged Prince Albert with having come to 
 the House on. that occasion to show his sympathy with
 
 358 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Peel's proposal. " The Prince Consort allowed himself,' 1 '' 
 said the Tory squire, " to be seduced by the Minister of 
 the Crown to come down to this House, to usher in, to 
 give eclat, and, as it were by reflection from the Queen, to 
 give the semblance of a personal sanction of her Majesty 
 to the measure." Prince Albert keenly resented this 
 taunt. He was never again seen in the House of 
 Commons. It would seem, however, that there was 
 some foundation for the belief that the Prince Consort 
 went down to the House of Commons on that occasion 
 at the earnest wish of Sir Robert Peel and of the Duke 
 of Wellington, who both thought that his presence 
 might influence some of the great Tory magnates, who 
 were so furious at the proposal to repeal the Corn Laws 
 that they quoted without pretext Lord Alvanley's 
 atrocious saying : " Peel ought not to die a natural 
 death."" Mr. Greville mentions in his "Journal" that 
 the Prince was present " to mark the confidence of the 
 Court. 1 " It was the first time that a member of the 
 Royal Family attended a debate in the House of 
 Commons. The presence of the Prince of Wales or the 
 Duke of York in the peers' 1 gallery is a frequent occur- 
 rence nowadays ; and no one ever dreams of suggesting, 
 that it is meant as a political demonstration or an 
 attempt to sap the integrity of any of our repre- 
 sentatives. 
 
 But if George III. could not go down to the House to 
 listen to the debates himself he determined to have in- 
 telligence of them at the earliest possible moment. It 
 was useless for him to go to the newspapers for the in- 
 formation he desired. In fact he himself took very good 
 care that the newspaper editors could only publish Par- 
 liamentary intelligence at the risk of heavy fine* and
 
 THE QUEEN'S REPORTER 359 
 
 long terms of imprisonment. During the exciting con- 
 test between John AVilkes and the House of Commons 
 from 1763 to 1770, as to whether in consequence of his 
 writings in his newspaper, the North Briton, he was a 
 fit and proper person to enter the presence of Mr. 
 Speaker and the Mace, as the representative of Middle- 
 sex, the populace, who sympathised with Wilkes, were 
 anxious to know how it fared with their hero, and they 
 naturally turned to the newspapers for news. Some of 
 the journals endeavoured to justify their existence by 
 satisfying during this contest the craving of their clients 
 for Parliamentary intelligence. They published brief 
 summaries of the debates on the Wilkes question in 
 the House of Commons. But this commendable display 
 of enterprise only aroused the ire of George III. " It is 
 highly necessary,"" he wrote, in high dudgeon, to Lord 
 North, " that this strange and lawless method of pub- 
 lishing debates in the papers should be put a stop to." 
 " Strange and lawless ! " How strange aye, and how 
 lawless these adjectives sound in our ears, in such a 
 connection, in these days of unfettered and unrestrained 
 Parliamentary reporting ! The King was bent, evidently, 
 on having the daring newspaper editors, or " the mis- 
 creants,'' 1 as he called them, punished by hook or by crook. 
 The ordinary courts of justice were unreliable, appa- 
 rently, for the purpose. " Is not the House of Lords, as 
 a court of record on which we can rely, the best court to 
 bring such miscreants before, as it can fine as well as 
 imprison," he continues; " and as the Lords have broader 
 shoulders to support any odium that this salutary 
 measure may occasion in the minds of the vulgar ? " 
 
 While George III. thus endeavoured to keep from his 
 subjects all knowledge of what took place in Parliament,
 
 360 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 he directed Mr. George Granville, the complacent Leader 
 of the House of Commons, to supply him every night 
 with the most minute and circumstantial reports of the 
 debates during the agitation about John Wilkes. Thus 
 was originated the custom of sending the Sovereign 
 nightly a letter descriptive of the proceedings in the 
 House of Commons. It has, therefore, now been in 
 vogue for over a century and a quarter. Pitt, Fox, 
 Canning, Peel, and Melbourne acted as Parliamentary 
 reporters for George III., George IV. and AVilliam IV.; 
 but these monarchs were not careful to preserve the 
 reports sent them by the Leaders of the House of 
 Commons during their respective reigns, for no trace of 
 the documents can now be found. 
 
 There is, however, in Le Marchanf s " Life of Lord 
 Althorp "" (who was Leader of the House of Commons at 
 the passing of the great Reform Bill), a copy of one of 
 the reports sent to William IV. The first passages of 
 it, dealing with a motion by Mr. Spencer Perceval, a 
 religious fanatic, for a General Fast owing to the dis- 
 turbed condition of the country, are as follows : 
 
 DOWNING STREET, January 27, 1832. 
 
 Viscount Althorp presents his humble duty to your 
 Majesty, and has the honour to inform your Majesty that 
 the debates in the House of Commons began last night 
 by a motion by Mr. Perceval for an address to your Majesty 
 to appoint a General Fast. Mr. Perceval excluded strangers 
 011 this occasion ; there is not, therefore, any account of the 
 debate or, rather, of his speech in the newspapers. 
 Viscount A. had endeavoured to prevent him from making 
 the motion by informing him that it was the intention of 
 your Majesty's servants to advise your Majesty to issue a 
 proclamation for this purpose. Mr. Perceval was not, how-
 
 THE QUEEN'S REPORTER S6l 
 
 ever, satisfied by this, and persevered in making the motion, 
 stating that he thought the suggestion ought to originate 
 in the House of Commons. Mr. Perceval spoke under the 
 highest state of excitement, with a Bible in his hand, from 
 which he made quotations for an hour and three quarters ; 
 but was at last persuaded to allow the notion to be nega- 
 tived without a division. 
 
 It is interesting to note that Sir Erskine May, the 
 great authority on Parliamentary procedure, who was for 
 many years Clerk of the House of Commons, considered 
 this practice of sending reports of the proceedings of 
 the House to the Sovereign a violation of the privi- 
 leges of Parliament, because Parliament had, in order 
 to guard against the arbitrary interference of the Crown 
 in its proceedings, established for centuries the Consti- 
 tutional doctrine that the Sovereign should neither 
 hear nor give credit to reports of its debates. However, 
 this declaration, when quoted with approval by Mr. 
 Leonard Courtney, an ex-Chairman of Committees, in 
 the House of Commons in 1879, in presence of Sir 
 Erskine May, was received with much laughter. The 
 occasion was a debate on a motion by Mr. Dillwyn, a 
 Welsh Radical member, to the effect " that to prevent 
 the growing abuse by her Majesty's Ministers of the pre- 
 rogative and influence of the Crown, it is neccessary that 
 the modes and limits of the action of the prerogative 
 should be more strictly observed.' 1 '' Mr. Courtney, who 
 supported the motion, contended that it was " an un- 
 doubted breach of the Constitution " for a Minister to 
 send a report of the proceedings of the House to the 
 Queen, and when members laughed in derision he quoted 
 Sir Erskine May in his support. But Mr. Gladstone, 
 who was in Opposition at the time, effectively ridi-
 
 362 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 culed the contention. The House might, he said, fairly 
 object to the details of its proceedings being conveyed 
 to the Sovereign at a period when the people were 
 debarred from receiving any information about the 
 doings of Parliament ; but it was, in his opinion, ridicu- 
 lous to say that it was an offence to communicate the 
 proceedings of the House to the Sovereign at a time when 
 they were published in every newspaper in the land. 
 The House evidently agreed with this opinion, for the 
 motion was not even pressed to a division. 
 
 Most of the recent leaders of the House of Commons 
 Lord Randolph Churchill, Sir Michael Hicks-Beach, 
 Mr. W. H. Smith, and Sir William Harcourt wrote 
 the report in their private room at some convenient 
 breathing time during the sitting, but Mr. Gladstone 
 (who filled the post of "Queen's Reporter' 1 '' in five Par- 
 liaments) always prepared it in the House, at intervals 
 during the night an example which was followed by 
 Mr. Arthur Balfour during his brief leadership of the 
 House in the last session of the Conservative Parliament 
 prior to the dissolution in 1892. Mr. Balfour, as leader 
 of the House in the present Parliament, still follows the 
 same practice. On a night when there is little to record 
 the right hon. gentleman waits till towards the close of 
 the sitting before he sets himself to the task. Generally 
 after midnight he may be noticed providing himself 
 from the table (always plentifully supplied with 
 stationery) with a sheet of House of Commons note- 
 paper, quarto size, and a blotting pad ; then taking his 
 seat on the Treasury Bench he writes the report with 
 the gold fountain pen attached to one end of his tandem 
 watch-chain, while the concluding business on "The 
 Orders of the Day ~* is being hurried through.
 
 THE QUEEN'S REPORTER 36S 
 
 It is the established etiquette for the Leader of the 
 House to use the third person and to address the Sovereign 
 in the second ; as indeed is done in all epistolary commu- 
 nications between a Minister and the Sovereign. Mr. 
 Gladstone always began his report with the formula, 
 '' Mr. Gladstone presents his humble duty to her Majesty 
 and begs to inform her that at the sitting of the House 
 of Commons to-day," &c., and this form of the record 
 has been followed by the other leaders of the House. 
 The Liberal chief often commenced the letter early in 
 the sitting, added to it as opportunity offered during the 
 evening, and finally he would read it over carefully, 
 dotting its "Ts " and crossing its "fs " before dispatch- 
 ing it to the Queen at the rising of the House. Seated 
 on the Treasury Bench, with a blotting pad placed on 
 his knee, as a desk or support, the Old Man wrote the 
 letter on the quarto notepaper of the House, with any 
 quill-pen which he might casually pick up from the 
 table. He invariably filled the four sides of this large 
 sheet of notepaper, and on occasions of extraordinary 
 interest the record often covered two sheets. When in- 
 terrupted in its composition in order to answer a ques- 
 tion or give a prompt denial to some statement made 
 in the course of a speech of a right hon. gentleman at 
 the other side of the table, he always retained posses- 
 sion of the document while on his feet, and he also 
 carried it with him into the Lobby in the case of a 
 division, returning to its preparation again the moment 
 he was able to resume his seat on the Treasury Bench. 
 
 How has that great statesman conveyed to the Queen 
 the intelligence of his many Parliamentary triumphs 
 during his long career as Leader of the House of Com- 
 mons the passing through the House of the Bill for
 
 364 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 the Disestablisment of the Irish Church in 1869; the 
 Irish Land Bill of 1870; the Ballot Bill of 1872 ; the 
 Irish Land Bill of 1881 ; the Reform and Redistribution 
 Bill of 1885 ; and the Home Rule Bill of 1893 to 
 mention only a few of the great measures he successfully 
 steered through the House of Commons, and all of which 
 save the Home Rule Bill have found places in the 
 Statute Book ? That is a secret which is known only to 
 a very limited number, indeed, probably, only to her 
 Majesty and himself; and it is impossible not to feel 
 somewhat envious of our posterity, who, towards the end 
 of the twentieth century, perhaps, will enjoy the perusal 
 of these historic documents in print. 
 
 Then there are Mr. Gladstone's Parliamentary defeats. 
 How has he written of these, and especially of the rejec- 
 tion of the Home Rule Bill of 1886 at one o'clock on the 
 morning of June 8 ? During the scene of wild excite- 
 ment which followed the announcement of the result of 
 the division on the second reading of the Bill 311 for, 
 341 against and while Lord Randolph Churchill, 
 standing on the corner seat of the front bench below the 
 gangway on the Opposition side, waved his hat enthusi- 
 astically over his head and vociferously led the 
 triumphant shouts of the victorious Unionists, Mr. 
 Gladstone was observed sitting on the Treasury Bench 
 calmly finishing his report of the proceedings of that 
 historic sitting for the Queen ! 
 
 Again, what a painful duty it must have been to the 
 " Old Parliamentary Hand " (as he called himself) with 
 his intense love for the House of Commons, and all its 
 historic associations, his noble conception of its dignity 
 as the governing body of the British Empire, to have to 
 inform the Queen, on the night of Thursday, July 27,
 
 THE QUEEN'S REPORTER 365 
 
 ]8J)-J, that blows were exchanged between honourable 
 members on the floor of the House that very night ! 
 He cannot have given a detailed account of the fracas, 
 which occurred that night in Committee on the Home 
 Rule Bill, for, as he told the Speaker subsequently, 
 neither his eyes nor his ears were sharp enough to enable 
 him to describe what had actually occurred ; and I saw 
 him myself, from the reporters 1 gallery, half-reclining on 
 the Treasury Bench, during the brawl, ga/ing sorrow- 
 fully at the Chairman (Mr. Mellor), who was vainly en- 
 deavouring to restore order, while the crowd of members 
 on the floor prevented him from seeing if he had cared 
 to see the fight between Irish Unionist and Nationalist 
 members on the Opposition benches. But the fierce and 
 angry shouts and ejaculations of the brawling members 
 must have reached the aged Premier, however desirous 
 he might have been to shut his ears to the shameful 
 clamour.
 
 366 
 
 CHAPTER XX 
 WHIPPING M.P.s TO WESTMINSTER 
 
 DURING a Session of Parliament readers of newspapers 
 meet now and then with the announcement that the 
 Government or the Opposition, as the case may be, have 
 issued a " four-line whip " to their supporters, urging their 
 attendance in the House of Commons on the occasion of 
 an important division. Notwithstanding the fierce light 
 of publicity that beats upon Parliamentary proceedings, 
 there are thousands of newspaper readers who are pro- 
 bably completely in the dai'k as to this " four-line whip," 
 or who have only a dim and haxy notion of what it really 
 means. It is a lithographed letter or summons issued to 
 members of Parliament, to secure a full attendance in 
 the House on occasions of critical divisions, when the 
 fate or policy of the Government or Opposition is at 
 stake. 
 
 An ordinary whip or summons to attend is frequently 
 issued by each party during a Parliamentary Session ; 
 but, as a rule, it is only on occasions of great import- 
 ance that a " four-line whip " is sent out. It gets its 
 name from the fact that the first word with which it 
 opens, " Important," and its concluding injunction, 
 " Your punctual attendance is most particularly re- 
 quested, 1 " are underscored with four lines. It also states 
 the particular business for which the urgent summons .is
 
 WHIPPING M.P.s TO WESTMINSTER 367 
 
 issued, and is signed by the Chief Whip of the party in 
 whose interest it is sent out. It has been said that a 
 one-line whip means " You ought to come " ; a two-line 
 whip, " You should come " ; a three-line whip, " You 
 must come 1 "; and a four-line whip, "Come or stay away 
 at your peril."" During the late Parliament the narrow 
 majority of the Liberal Government necessitated the 
 frequent issue by their Whips of a new kind of summons 
 of the most peremptory and threatening character. It 
 was underscored five times in red ink. It meant, " Come, 
 or there will be a smash-up of the Government, and a 
 General Election." 
 
 I have said that the " four-line whip " is signed by 
 the Chief Whip. It will be seen, therefore, that there 
 are personal as well as impersonal Whips. There are on 
 each side (for the Government and for the Opposition) 
 two Whips, senior and junior, and three or four assistant 
 Whips all members of Parliament, of course who are 
 nominated by the leader of each party, to act as his 
 aides-de-camp, so to speak, in the ever- waging fight for 
 place and power on the floor of the House of Commons, 
 between the Liberal and Conservative battalions. They 
 derive their name from the whipper-in of a hunt ; and 
 are, indeed, most important personages. They do not 
 loom so large on the public eye as the Prime Minister, 
 or the Leader of the House of Commons, or the Leader of 
 the Opposition, whose speeches are reported columns 
 long in the newspapers. But these, after all, are but the 
 figureheads in the battles between the two sides of the 
 House. The movements of the battalions are really 
 controlled and directed by the Whips, who work behind 
 the scenes, and whose names, consequently, rarely appear 
 in the newspapers, j ust like the engineers of a big Trans-
 
 368 THE BOOK OF PARLI \\I1'.\ I 
 
 atlantic steamer, whom the passengers never see, but on 
 whose ability, skill, anil resource the safety of the 
 mighty vessel largely depends. 
 
 The position of Chief Whip of the party in office is 
 naturally more onerous than the position of Chief Whip 
 to the party in Opposition. It is no exaggeration to say 
 that the post of Chief Whip is one of the most im- 
 portant and onerous in the Government, for on him the 
 fate of the Ministry, or the success of their policy, 
 frequently depends. The Chief Whip does not, it is 
 true, initiate measures. That is the duty of the heads 
 of the Government. But once a Bill is laid before the 
 House, its fate and fortunes almost entirelv depend 
 upon the Chief Whip. He has to steer it safely past 
 the rocks and sand-banks that abound in the division 
 lobbies. To drop the metaphor, he has to secure the 
 attendance in the House at all hours of a sufficient 
 number of the supporters of the Government to avoid 
 defeat in a division a hcavv task in any event, but most 
 heavy when the rival parties are in mi m tars pretty 
 evenly balanced. It is rather a thankless position, too. 
 In the hour of triumph, after a critical division, the 
 Chief Whip, who has mustered the big battalions that 
 won the victory, is forgotten ; but he is remembered 
 with bitterness in the shadow of defeat and disaster, and 
 on his shoulders the blame for the loss of the fight is 
 generally cast. It is then said that he was remiss in his 
 duties ; and the newspapers, probably, announce that he 
 hail a "bad quarter of an hour 1 ' 1 with the defeated 
 Ministers. 
 
 The principal duty of the Opposition Whip is to 
 muster, on the occasion of a big party division, as 
 striking a demonstration against the Government in the
 
 WHIPPING M.P.s TO WESTMINSTER StiQ 
 
 division lobbies as is possible. If he is wideawake and 
 alert, and has his men well under control, he may get a 
 chance of defeating the Government. But that chance 
 comes rarely nowadays; and if the defeat was due to 
 a snap division, or an unexpected division, on a not 
 very important subject, no Government would dream of 
 taking it seriously and resigning. 
 
 To avoid any mishap of that kind, the Chief Whip of 
 the Government must be always in the House. He 
 must also know his men thoroughly. He must be 
 acquainted with their peculiarities, and know how best 
 to approach each and every one of them whether 
 with cajolery or with a threat whether with an 
 invitation to a social function, or a word of praise or 
 flattery from the Prime Minister or the Leader of the 
 House, when he requires their attendance for a division. 
 He is always flitting restlessly about the House and 
 lobbies, consulting with the leaders of his party or 
 mixing with the rank-and-file to ascertain their views 
 and feelings, and to see that dissatisfaction or insubordi- 
 nation, if it ever manifests itself, is not allowed to spread. 
 He must be a man of good temper and of pleasant 
 persuasive manners ; possessed of tact, discrimination, 
 prudence, and knowledge of human nature ; able to keep 
 his forces in order, in good spirits, and amenable to the 
 crack of the party whip. 
 
 It is therefore a matter of vital importance for a 
 Government on entering office to obtain a suitable man 
 for the post of Whip. The post, too, has few attractions, 
 if any, for able men. The Whip is cut off' from taking 
 uart in debates, whether he be in office or ill Opposition, 
 and therefore the principal avenue which leadn to dis- 
 tinction and success in the House of Commons is closed 
 
 2 A
 
 370 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 to him. No man with the gift of speech would accept 
 the office. 
 
 The office of Chief Whip is not, however, without its 
 recompenses and its rewards. He fills an office in the 
 Administration styled "Patronage Secretary to the 
 Treasury," the duties of which are purely formal, but to 
 which the substantial salary of <*2000 per annum is 
 attached. The office is a survival of the time, not so 
 very long ago, indeed, when the wheels of Government 
 were made to run smooth by the distribution of offices, 
 honours, ecclesiastical preferments, and even sums of 
 money the money, too, of the taxpayers for votes and 
 other services to the party in office. The Chief Whip 
 is still the dispenser of whatever little patronage remains 
 in the hands of the Government outside political offices 
 in the shape of posts, appointments to which are 
 vested in the Crown ; and if a member of Parliament 
 desires to be made a knight or a baronet or a baron in 
 recognition of his party services he first approaches the 
 Chief Whip, who conveys the wish to the Prime 
 Minister. The assistant Ministerial Whips are appointed 
 " Junior Lords of the Treasury " at salaries of ,11000 
 each. The Whips of the Opposition receive no financial 
 recompense from the State ; but as they are not doomed 
 to perpetual banishment " in the cool shades of Opposi- 
 tion," they live and labour in the hope of the good time 
 that is coming when they will enjoy a share in the 
 substantial spoils of office. 
 
 The social distinction of the office of Chief Whip is 
 also great. Again, the Chief Whip is the negotiator or 
 ambassador between parties. All communications of ;i 
 political nature between parties pass through the Whips. 
 Another duty of the Whips is to superintend that
 
 WHIPPING M.P.s TO WESTMINSTER 371 
 
 curious system known in Parliamentary circles as 
 "pairing."" A member who is thoroughly loyal to his 
 party will never think of quitting the precincts of the 
 House without first informing his Whip, and, if his 
 absence is likely to be protracted, getting paired. This 
 means securing a member of the opposite party who 
 agrees to absent himself from the House for the same 
 time be it an hour, a day, a week, or a month and 
 thus neutralise each other's absence in any divisions 
 that may take place while they are away. " Pairing " 
 is not recognised by any rule or regulation of the House, 
 written or unwritten, and therefore there is nothing to 
 prevent a member who is " paired " from taking part in 
 a division but his own sense of honour. The conditions 
 of " pairing " have, however, never been wilfully violated. 
 
 The Whips also arrange the order of a debate and fix 
 its length. They meet together, the senior Whip of 
 each party, on the eve of an important debate, or " field 
 night,"" and decide the order the combatants shall enter 
 the lists ; or, in other words, arrange what important 
 member of the Government shall speak, and what im- 
 portant member of the Opposition shall reply. The 
 Whips then communicate to the Speaker or to the 
 Chairman of Committees, as the case may be, the names 
 of the members whom they desire to have called as the 
 best debaters on each side, and the Speaker or Chairman 
 generally accepts the suggestion. It is obvious that the 
 debate would be entirely haphazard and chaotic if there 
 were no such rule. 
 
 It will be seen, therefore, that the duties of the Chief 
 \Yhip are multifarious as well as laborious. The most 
 unpleasant part of the post is the constant attendance in 
 the House which it necessitates. On a quiet evening
 
 372 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 the Whip may leave a junior on duty, and retire to the 
 private room which he has at his disposal for rest or 
 recreation. But he dares not leave the precincts of the 
 House. A critical division may occur at any moment ; 
 and it behoves the Chief Whip to dispatch at once an 
 urgent summons by telegram and special messengers a 
 corps of which is in attendance in Parliament in the 
 interest of both parties to the followers of the Govern- 
 ment in the clubs, in the theatres, at balls and at 
 suppers, to hurry to Westminster to save their party 
 from the discredit, if not disaster, of defeat. The sudden 
 and dramatic defeat of the Liberal Ministry on June 21, 
 1895, when it was least expected, shows the unsleeping 
 vigilance that is required on the part of the Government 
 Whips. 
 
 Let us see, now, how the Whips work. Each party 
 has employed in the lobby of the House of Commons 
 a number of clerks, whose business it is to "mark in ri - 
 that is the technical term the names of members as 
 they enter and leave the House. Therefore, when a 
 division is approaching, the Whips on each side, by 
 referring to these lists, can tell the number of their fol- 
 lowers and the number of their opponents in the pre- 
 cincts of the House, and consequently the result of the 
 division. If the Whips of the Government find they 
 have not sufficient followers in the House to win in the 
 division, word is sent round amongst the members of 
 their party present to keep the debate going until the 
 required number of followers turn up. Similar tactics 
 are pursued by the Opposition if they think that by de- 
 laying the division they can make a better show. 
 
 An amusing illustration of these tactics occurred 
 during the term of office of the Conservative Govern-
 
 WHIPPING M.P.s TO WESTMINSTER 373 
 
 ment of 1886-92. It was the Royal Hunt Cup day of 
 Ascot week. The business clown on the order paper of 
 the House of Commons was unimportant, and so a large 
 number of supporters of the Government thought they 
 might, with safety to the party and much pleasure to 
 themselves, spend the afternoon at Ascot. But they had 
 not reckoned on a little plot hatched by the Liberals. 
 Shortly after the House met a motion for adjournment 
 was made from the Opposition benches, in order to call 
 attention to something that had happened in Ireland in 
 which the Government were concerned. A motion of 
 this kind can be brought on without notice, provided it 
 is supported by forty members standing up in their 
 places. Of course the required number of members were 
 in attendance. In fact, the Opposition benches were 
 thronged, while the gaps on the Ministerial benches were 
 neither few nor far between. Naturally, the Govern- 
 ment Whips were in a state of mind bordering on 
 panic. The task before them was to get their men 
 up from Ascot before the division was taken. Urgent 
 telegrams were forwarded to the course; a special 
 train was at once chartered, and as many of the 
 Conservative members as could possibly be laid hands 
 on were torn from the gay and festive scene and 
 dispatched to London. 
 
 But meantime the debate showed signs of collapsing. 
 The speakers on the Opposition side were extremely few 
 and exceedingly brief. They wanted that division to 
 come off at once. Then it was that Mr. Henry Chaplin 
 stepped into the breach and saved his party from defeat. 
 He delivered one of the longest speeches that has ever 
 been made in the House of Commons. The quarter- 
 hours and the half-hours flew by, and though the
 
 374 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 impatient Opposition roared and howled at him, Mr. 
 Chaplin spoke on not very connectedly or coherently, 
 it is true, but it was time and not wisdom that was 
 needed in the interests of his party. At last he got 
 word from the Whips that the Ascot contingent had 
 arrived, and he resumed his seat. The division was then 
 taken ; but the Government emerged triumphantly from 
 the division lobbies. 
 
 Very small causes sometimes lead to momentous issues 
 in Parliamentary affairs. During the Session of 1875 
 the Disraeli Administration were defeated in a snap 
 division, on an amendment moved by the Irish members, 
 in Committee on an Irish Bill, because it was found at 
 the last moment that the bell between the House and 
 St. Stephen's Club, where a large number of Conservative 
 members were dining, would not ring. It was subse- 
 quently discovered that the wires were cut. ( )n a similar 
 occasion, big with the fate of the Government, the Whips 
 sent out their corps of messengers to summon their fol- 
 lowers from dinner-tables, balls, clubs, and theatres, but 
 not a single cab was available in Palace Yard. They 
 had all been sent on bogus missions a short time pre- 
 viously by the Opposition Whips. 
 
 A story is told in the lobby of the House of Commons 
 but, let me add, that is no guarantee of its truth 
 that some years ago a Government was defeated at the 
 dinner-table of one of its leading opponents. This gen- 
 tleman invited twelve of his friends among the sup- 
 porters of the Government to dinner on a night a big 
 party division was to take place. The twelve never 
 turned up for the division, although the host did. 
 
 What happened ? No, the host did not hocus his 
 guests. But his champagne was unsurpassable in quality
 
 WHIPPING M.P.s TO WESTMINSTER 37 f 
 
 and unlimited in quantity ; and so when the guests 
 should be walking through the lobbies of the House of 
 Commons, they were at least, eleven of them calmly 
 reclining under the table. One escaped ; but he never 
 reached the House of Commons. He was found by the 
 police endeavouring to let himself into Millbank Prison 
 with a latchkey ! 
 
 An amusing incident connected with the fatal division 
 of June 21, 1895, which led to the resignation of the 
 Liberal Government, is also worth recording as showing 
 the unexpected mishaps and misadventures which often 
 decide the issue of a division. Shortly before the divi- 
 sion referred to a Tory M.P., who is a member of the 
 St. Stephen's Club, which stands at the corner of the 
 Thames Embankment, opposite to the Clock Tower of 
 the Houses of Parliament, got, with some difficulty, the 
 permission of the Opposition Whips to pay a visit to 
 the club to dine, and only after giving a solemn promise 
 that he would rush back to the House the moment the 
 division signal, which connects the club with the pre- 
 cincts of the House, was sounded. He happened to be 
 comfortably seated in the smoking-room of the club, 
 enjoying a cigar after a good dinner, when the division 
 bell of the House was rung. Jumping to his feet, he 
 rushed out without his hat. Now, there are two sub- 
 ways leading from the club one connecting it directly 
 with the Houses of Parliament, and the other leading to 
 the Westminster landing-stage of the river steamers. In 
 his hurry the M.P. ran down the wrong subway, taking 
 the one leading to the river side, instead of the one com- 
 municating with the House. Perceiving his wild flight, 
 and doubtless impressed by his excited appearance, the 
 policeman on duty at the end of the tunnel jumped
 
 376 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 to the conclusion that he was about to commit suicide 
 by throwing himself into the river. 
 
 Actuated by the best of motives, the policeman seized 
 him, and insisted upon taking him to New Scotland 
 Yard. Nor was the officer satisfied until a Liberal mem- 
 ber who happened to be leisurely walking along the 
 Embankment to the House (unaware of the perilous 
 position of the Government) vouched for the sanity and 
 respectability of the Tory M.P. His vote was, of course, 
 lost ; and so, too, was the vote of the Liberal M.P. 
 Indeed, the Liberal who told the story declared that 
 if he had not happened to witness the plight of the Tory 
 he would have got to the House in time to support the 
 Government in the division. Another cruel example of 
 the irony of fate ! 
 
 A snap division like this is not of frequent occurrence. 
 As a rule the big party divisions are fixed by mutual 
 agreement, not only for a certain night, but for a certain 
 hour ; and so the Government Whips are able to have 
 their men on the spot. It may be asked then how it 
 came to pass that the Liberal Whips allowed the 
 division, which proved so fatal to them, to be taken 
 without making sure that they were strong enough to 
 win. The truth is, they were out-manomvred, or caught 
 napping. There were more of their opponents present 
 than thev thought. Had they had the least suspicion of 
 danger, they could have arranged for the discussion to 
 \ye " kept alive " until a sufficient number of their men 
 to prevent defeat had arrived. It is said, indeed, that 
 there was a regular Parliamentary ambuscade on the 
 occasion. By those who " mark in " for the Liberals it 
 was calculated that the Government had a majority of 
 sixteen ; by those who " mark in " for the Tories the
 
 WHIPPING M.P.s TO WESTMINSTER 377 
 
 majority of the Government was put down at thirteen. 
 The explanation given for the discrepancy between the 
 calculations of the official counters and the actual result 
 is that several Liberal Unionists, who are said to have 
 arranged the ambuscade, came into the House by the 
 terrace, and in that way escaped the observation of the 
 counting clerks in the lobby. 
 
 The ways of the Parliamentary Whips are often 
 strange and peculiar ; but the story of the ambuscade is 
 hardly credible, especially in the light of a curious and 
 unprecedented episode which occurred at the announce- 
 ment of the numbers of the division. The division was 
 taken on a motion for the reduction by 100 of the 
 salary of Mr. Campbell-Bannerman, Secretary for War, 
 on the ground that the stores of small arms ammuni- 
 tion were insufficient. The Ministerialists were in the 
 " No" lobby, and the Opposition in the " Aye"" lobby. 
 As the Whips, who act as "tellers'" in a division, 
 came back from the lobbies almost simultaneously, it 
 was perceived that, whatever the result, it was a close 
 division. The respective tellers having given the numbers 
 from each lobby to the Clerk at the table, the latter 
 handed the paper, containing the result of the division, 
 to Mr. Akers-Douglas, the Chief Whip of the Opposi- 
 tion, thus indicating that the Government were defeated, 
 and accordingly the Unionists cheered long and vigor- 
 ously. However, Mr. Akers-Douglas, after glancing at 
 the paper, handed it to Mr. Thomas Ellis, the Chief 
 Government Whip, and a cheer that was like a sigh of 
 relief, went up from the occupants of the Ministerial 
 benches. The four tellers were now ranged in a line, 
 fronting the table, as is customary the tellers of the 
 victorious party to the left, facing the Speaker ; and the
 
 378 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 tellers of the vanquished to his right when to the 
 mingled amazement and amusement of the House, a 
 fresh development took place in the extraordinary 
 position of doubt and perplexity in which the Whips 
 found themselves. Mr. Ellis, before announcing the 
 result of the division, paused a second to examine the 
 nu inters, and then, satisfied that his side were the 
 vanquished, he handed the paper back again to Mr. 
 Akers-Douglas, and retreated with his fellow teller to 
 the side of the defeated, on the right, facing the 
 Speaker. 
 
 This incident occupied a considerable time, as time is 
 measured in seasons of strain and excitement. The 
 cheers and counter-cheers, which were marked bvan un- 
 usual vehemence, were heard in the lobby and corridors, 
 and there was a rush of members to the liar, who kept 
 eagerly inquiring the cause of this startling exhibition 
 in the House. When at last it was known that the 
 Government were defeated by 132 votes to 125, a scene 
 of unbounded enthusiasm on the part of the- I'nionists 
 ensued. The episode, which is unexampled in the his- 
 tory of Parliament, shows that if there had been an 
 ambuscade, as was alleged, the Unionist Whips knew 
 nothing of it. What is more probable is that the 
 division was a greater surprise to the victors than to 
 the vanquished.
 
 379 
 
 CHAPTER XXI 
 
 VOTING SUPPLIES IN THE HOUSE OF 
 COMMONS 
 
 THE House of Commons, composed as it is of the elected 
 representatives of the taxpayers of the realm, has sole 
 control of the collection and expenditure of the national 
 revenue, or of the mode in which taxes are raised, and 
 the manner in which taxes are spent. Years ago supplies 
 were voted by the Commons, on the direct application 
 of the Sovereign, without any specific information being 
 afforded as to the financial needs of the State, or any 
 guarantee being given that the money would be spent 
 solely for the public weal. The King had at his com- 
 mand a revenue supplied by the rents of the Crown 
 lands, and the proceeds of certain duties, which were 
 settled on him for life. With the funds thus obtained 
 the King conducted the Government of the realm as he 
 pleased, with little or no regard for the opinions of 
 Parliament. The money was mainly spent by the King 
 for his own pleasure, and to sustain his own influence 
 and power. It was only when his personal revenue 
 failed to supply his needs that the King resorted to the 
 embarrassing and hateful expedient of asking the 
 Commons to make good the deficiency. If the Sovereign 
 had at his disposal a fat purse, it was little heed he paid 
 to public rights or public wrongs. But when his treasury
 
 380 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 was empty, he went to the Commons to solicit further 
 subsidies in a repentant and yielding mood, real or pre- 
 tended, and then the representatives of the people wore 
 able, as conditions precedent to voting the money asked 
 for by his impecunious majesty, to have grievances 
 redressed ; to extort concessions ; to make the bounds 
 of freedom wider yet. A change in this order of things 
 came after the Revolution. The House of Commons 
 took over the control of the entire naval, military, and 
 civil expenditure of the country ; they annually voted 
 and paid the sums required for the different services, and 
 the King got simply an allowance, called the Civil List, 
 calculated to meet the expenses of the Royal Household. 
 The votes of supply are now founded on annual estimates 
 prepared on the collective responsibility of the Cabinet. 
 These estimates are carefully calculated to raise just so 
 much money as will cover the expenses for the coming 
 year. And that money is strictly appropriated within 
 the year to the specific purposes for which it is voted by 
 the House of Commons. 
 
 Long ago, too, the House of Lords exercised co- 
 ordinate control with the Commons over the national 
 revenue. But the interference of the Lords in supply 
 was always regarded with jealousy and resentment by 
 the Commons ; and at last, after many hot controversies, 
 the people's representatives succeeded, after the Revolu- 
 tion, in establishing for evermore their exclusive right to 
 determine " the matter, the measure, and the time "" of 
 every tax imposed upon the people. The principle upon 
 which this exclusive right of the Commons is founded 
 has been well expressed by Lord Chatham. " Taxation," 
 said he, "is no part of the governing or legislative 
 power. The taxes are a voluntary gift and grant of the
 
 VOTING SUPPLIES IX THE COMMONS 381 
 
 Commons alone. In legislation, the three estates of the 
 realm are alike concerned ; but the concurrence of the 
 peers and the Crown to a tax the gift and grant of the 
 Commons alone is only necessary to clothe it with the 
 form of a law."" Accordingly, all proposals involving 
 the raising or spending of taxes can only originate in 
 the Commons. Though all Bills embodying such pro- 
 posals are, after they have passed the Commons, sent 
 up in the usual fashion to the Lords ; and although the 
 Loi'ds may in theory reject a Money Bill (they are 
 expressly prohibited from modifying its clauses or alter- 
 ing it in any way), the rejection of any such Bill would 
 now be considered a breach of Constitutional usage 
 and an invasion of the privileges of the representative 
 Chambers. Again, if a Bill which entails the expendi- 
 ture of public money is introduced in the Lords, the 
 clause dealing with the amount required is either 
 printed in italics or written in red ink in the copy 
 which is sent down to the Commons, to convey that it 
 does not form part of the Bill, but is merely offered as 
 a suggestion for the acceptance of the representative 
 House. 
 
 The sums of money necessary for the administration 
 of the affairs of the L'nited Kingdom and the defence of 
 our world-wide Empire are enormous. Over ninety 
 millions of money is annually raised for this purpose. 
 In the year ending with March 1894 the exact amount 
 was 91, 302,846; last year (1895) it was ^93,918,421. 
 These figures do not include the payments out of the 
 national exchequer to local bodies in aid of local taxa- 
 tion, which of late amount to over six millions per 
 annum ; so that the gross imperial expenditure at pre- 
 sent is close on i100,000,000 a vear. This enormou.-.
 
 382 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 public revenue comes, either directly or indirectly, from 
 the pockets of the people. 
 
 The tendency of the national fiscal policy in our days 
 is to remove imposts from articles of consumption, 
 especially those which are necessaries, as distinguished 
 from luxuries, and from raw materials used in manu- 
 factures, and to increase the taxes on income and 
 property. But, nevertheless, the vast bulk of the 
 revenue still comes from the indirect taxation yielded 
 by the Customs and Inland Revenue. Customs are 
 imposts levied on a part of the foreign trade of the 
 country, or on tea, tobacco, wine and spirits, that come 
 to us from abroad. The Inland Revenue consists of 
 revenue derived from the internal resources of the 
 country, such as excise duties on home-produced beer, 
 spirits, and malt, the income-tax, and various other taxes 
 on property. Of the ^98,466,798 raised in 1895, the 
 greater portion, or ='62,835,263, came from the Inland 
 Revenue (which includes both direct and indirect taxes, 
 the latter, however, yielding the most revenue), and 
 =19,974,601 from Customs. The Post Office Service 
 yielded o J 10,472,876; the Telegraph Service, X J 2,534,262; 
 and the remaining sum, between two and three millions, 
 was derived from miscellaneous sources, such as fee stamps, 
 patents for inventions, and from the old hereditary 
 revenues of the Crown from woods, forests, and lands 
 (,414,450), which, with two exceptions, have been 
 surrendered to Parliament in exchange for the Civil 
 List, or the ^407,301 (including ^60,000 for the Queen's 
 privy purse) paid for the salaries and expenses of the 
 Royal Household. This sum is exclusive of the 
 =*! 87,796 granted in annuities and pensions to other 
 members of the Roval Family. The two hereditary
 
 VOTING SUPPLIES IN THE COMMONS 383 
 
 revenues of the Crown which still remain in the posses- 
 sion of the Royal Family, and are wholly exempt from 
 Parliamentary control, are the revenues of the Duchy of 
 Lancaster, amounting to 50,000 a year, which go to 
 the Queen, and the revenues of the Duchy of Cornwall, 
 amounting annually to ^60,000, which go to the Prince 
 of Wales. 
 
 The entire revenue of the country is gathered in from 
 its various sources by the State departments charged 
 with its collection ; and it forms, when paid into the 
 Bank of England and the Bank of Ireland, to the 
 account of " Her Majesty's Exchequer,"" one common 
 fund which is called " The Consolidated Fund."" Pay- 
 ments from the national Exchequer are of two kinds 
 namely, " Consolidated Fund Services " and " Supply 
 Services." 
 
 The first services consist of regularly recurring annual 
 charges, that have been already authorised and made 
 permanent by Acts of Parliament, and which, therefore, 
 are issued to the Treasury without having to come every 
 year under the supervision of the House of Commons. 
 These charges amount to about =28,500,000. As much 
 as twenty-five millions of this sum being indeed the 
 biggest slice of the public revenue go to pay interest 
 on our National Debt (which amounted at the last finan- 
 cial year to about ^669,104,024), and to create a sink- 
 ing fund for its redemption. Over half a million of the 
 Consolidated Fund Service goes to the Queen and other 
 members of the Royal Family ; another half million for 
 the salaries and pensions of our judges and magistrates ; 
 about 1 3 3-39,000 for annuities and pension :> for certain 
 naval and military services (including annuities to the 
 heir> of Nelson and Wellington), and for diplomatic,
 
 384 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 political, and civil services ; about =82,000 for existing 
 salaries and allowances to high State functionaries as, 
 for instance, the X J 20,000 to the Lord Lieutenant of 
 Ireland, and the P5000 to the Speaker of the House of 
 Commons ; and the remainder, or about < J 337,000, for 
 miscellaneous services. 
 
 The effect of placing these charges on the Consolidated 
 Fund is that they are entirely removed beyond the 
 criticism of the House of Commons. The idea, of course, 
 is that such subjects as the payment of our National 
 Debt on which the credit of the country depends and 
 the annuities of the Royal Family, the allowances to the 
 descendants of national heroes and faithful servants of 
 the State, and the salaries of our judges and magistrates, 
 and other high State functionaries, ought not to be liable 
 every year to discussion, and perhaps heated and undig- 
 nified criticism, in the House of Commons. 
 
 Over the " Supply Services," or the second class of 
 charges on the national Exchequer, the House of Com- 
 mons has entire control, for they must be specially voted by 
 the House every year. They come to about 1 J 63,000,000 ; 
 and are divided into three classes Army, Navy, and 
 Civil Service. The Army estimates in 1895 amounted to 
 close on twenty-one millions ; the Navy estimates to 
 nearly twenty millions, and the Civil Service estimates 
 to about twenty-two millions. 
 
 The estimates are, in the first instance, prepared by 
 the Ministers at the head of the various State depart- 
 ments which spend the money. The Secretary for War 
 is responsible for the Army estimates ; the First Lord 
 of the Admiralty for the Navy estimates ; and to men- 
 tion only two of the seven departments which come under 
 the general head of" the Civil Service " the Postmaster
 
 VOTING SUPPLIES IN THE COMMONS 385 
 
 General for the Post Office estimates ; the Home Secre- 
 tary for the Home Office estimates. But these estimates 
 of the amounts which in the opinion of the Ministers 
 are required to cany on the work of their departments 
 for twelve months are subjected to careful scrutiny (to 
 see that they are framed with a due regard to economy) 
 by the Treasury, a department which exercises a jealous 
 control over the other State departments, in all matters 
 involving the expenditure of public money, before they 
 are adopted by the Cabinet, and formally submitted to 
 the consideration of the House of Commons. The 
 Treasury, by all accounts, keeps a tight hold on the 
 strings of the national purse ; and its approval of any 
 proposal which would compel " Sandy, Taffy, John, and 
 Paddy " to put their hands deeper into their trousers 1 
 pockets is difficult to obtain, unless indeed it involves a 
 question of policy, to which the party in office is pledged, 
 when, of course, the economical scruples of the Treasury 
 must give way. 
 
 Every one has heard of "The Budget." It is the 
 comprehensive statement of the Chancellor of the Ex- 
 chequer, to the House of Commons, at the end of the 
 financial year (March 31), dealing with the probable 
 income and expenditure of the ensuing twelve months 
 and with the general financial prospects of the kingdom. 
 The amount of money which the Chancellor of the 
 Exchequer in his Budget recommends the House to 
 raise is intended to provide for the public expenditure 
 required during the year and during the year only. 
 This means that the revenue received during the year is 
 supposed to be spent within the year. The calculations 
 of the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his Budget are 
 based as regards revenue upon the returns of the past 
 
 SB
 
 386 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 year and as regards expenditure upon the estimates of 
 the heads of departments. 
 
 " Budget night " is awaited with an almost feverish 
 anxiety. It is one of the big nights of the House of 
 Commons a night when the House is crowded to its 
 fullest extent and looks its very best. Great things are 
 expected from the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The 
 accounts of the Exchequer have already been published. 
 It is therefore known whether the estimated revenue 
 balances the estimated expenditure ; or whether there 
 will be a deficit an excess of the estimated ex- 
 penditure over the estimated revenue; or, better still, 
 a surplus an excess of the estimated revenue over 
 the estimated expenditure. If there is a prospective 
 deficit the Chancellor of the Exchequer must devise 
 means for meeting it. New taxes will have to be im- 
 posed or existing taxes augmented. If, on the other 
 hand, there is a prospective surplus the Chancellor of 
 the Exchequer chooses the particular imposts to be 
 modified or abolished. And even if expenditure and 
 revenue are evenly balanced there is always the prospect 
 of some readjustment of the public burdens some 
 transfer of taxation from one class to another class, 
 from some commodities to other commodities being- 
 announced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The 
 financial proposals and schemes of the Government are 
 kept profound secrets until they are disclosed in the 
 Budget statement. " Budget night " is usually, there- 
 fore, a night of surprises. 
 
 There are two Committees of the whole House for 
 dealing with the national revenue and expenditure. One 
 is called " Committee of Ways and Means," and the 
 other " Committee of Supply." The Committee of
 
 VOTING SUPPLIES IX THE COMMONS 387 
 
 Ways and Means deals with the proposals of the Govern- 
 ment for raising by loans, taxes, duties, or imposts of 
 any description the money required for the administra- 
 tion and defence of the State. In other words, it deter- 
 mines how the money required shall be raised and 
 whence it shall come. The Committee of Supply decides 
 what sums of money are sufficient to meet the require- 
 ments of the various State departments. In other words, 
 it authorises the expenditure of the national revenue. 
 The House, accordingly, goes into Committee of Ways 
 and Means to hear and consider the Budget statement 
 of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The proposals of 
 the right honourable gentleman are reduced to the form 
 of resolutions which are adopted, amended or rejected 
 by the Committee, and those that are agreed to are 
 reported to the House and embodied in Bills, which 
 have to go through all the stages prescribed for legisla- 
 tive measures before they become law. 
 
 The first day the House goes into Committee of 
 Supply after the assembling of a new Parliament is 
 marked by an interesting event. This is the election of 
 the Chairman of Committees. The office, though of no 
 especial dignity, is not very many degrees less in import- 
 ance than that of Speaker, for the holder presides in 
 Committee of Ways and Means when the Budget is 
 brought forward, in Committee of Supply when the 
 Estimates are under consideration, and in Committee on 
 the clauses of all Bills. Since 1853 he takes the chair 
 as Deputy-Speaker during the unavoidable absence of 
 the Speaker. The office is held, like the Speakership, 
 until the dissolution of Parliament, and carries with it a 
 salary of%500 per annum (or half that of the Speaker), 
 but, unlike the Speakership, there is no official residence
 
 388 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 and no pension. A member of the party in office is 
 always appointed to the post. The brief and simple 
 manner in which this appointment is made is in striking 
 contrast with the ceremonial which attends the election 
 to the Speak ership. Directly the order " Supply " was 
 read out for the first time by the Clerk, after the 
 assembling of the present Parliament in September, 
 1895, the Speaker descended from the Chair, and Mr. 
 Arthur Balfour, the Leader of the House, simultaneously 
 rising, said, " I move that Mr. James William Lowther 
 do take the chair." The motion was endorsed by a 
 cheer from the Ministerial benches, and, as no one made 
 any observation or proposed any other candidate, Mr. 
 James William Lowther took the chair accordingly 
 not the Speaker's Chair, but the place at the table 
 usually occupied by the Clerk, who leaves the House for 
 the time being. If any contest had arisen, the Speaker 
 would have resumed the Chair, and the Chairman would 
 then have been elected by the vote of the House. But 
 a contest for the office is, I believe, unknown in modern 
 Parliamentary annals. The Chairman shares with the 
 Speaker, and with him alone, the privilege of being able 
 to enforce the closure ; the temporary Chairmen who are 
 appointed to replace him, when necessary, in Committee 
 are not endowed with any such authority. The Chair- 
 man does not wear any uniform or distinctive garb. He 
 usually appears in evening dress. 
 
 Unofficial members of the House of Commons have 
 not the right to propose a motion for the increase of 
 any of the Estimates before the Committee of Supply. 
 Bills introduced by private members necessitating the 
 imposition of new charges contain a clause that the 
 necessary expenses "shall be defrayed out of moneys
 
 VOTING SUPPLIES IN THE COMMONS 389 
 
 hereafter voted by Parliament." It is easy to account 
 for this restriction on the privileges of members of 
 Parliament. If members could propose the expenditure 
 of public money, it is not ninety millions, but nine 
 hundred and ninety-nine millions that would be required 
 to meet the claims they would be compelled to make on 
 behalf of their constituents, to say nothing of the cost of 
 their own peculiar and expensive legislative hobbies. 
 
 A member, therefore, cannot move to increase a vote. 
 That can only be done by the responsible Minister. 
 But a member may move the reduction of a vote. Com- 
 mittee of Supply, therefore, affords to every representa- 
 tive the opportunity of raising any grievance his 
 constituents or the public generally may feel against 
 any of the departments or Ministers whose expenses and 
 salaries are covered by the votes. In the old times, 
 when the entire executive authority was possessed by the 
 King, when Ministers were appointed by him and 
 responsible to him alone, the representatives of the 
 people in Parliament complained of grievances and 
 insisted upon their redress before voting the tax the 
 King demanded. But now that all executive and ad- 
 ministrative authority have passed into the hands of 
 Ministers, complaints and remonstrances in regard to 
 wrongs and grievances are addressed to the Ministers 
 concerned during Committee of Supply; and if the 
 explanations are not satisfactory, a reduction in the 
 vote under consideration is moved. There is no doubt 
 that the anticipation of criticism in Committee of Supply 
 has a restraining influence on Ministers. It enables the 
 representatives of the people to exercise a control over 
 the executive Government, to check abuses in the public 
 exjxmditure ; and therefore tends to maintain that
 
 390 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 honest and pure administration in the State departments 
 which has been so long the proud boast of this kingdom. 
 
 A motion for the reduction of a vote is rarely carried. 
 As a rule it is moved simply to allow attention to be 
 called to some question, and when that purpose has 
 been effected the motion is withdrawn. But if the 
 motion is pressed to a division, as it frequently is if the 
 members who support it are not satisfied with the 
 explanation of the Minister, it is, of course, opposed by 
 the followers of the Government and is usually rejected. 
 If, however, a motion for the reduction of a vote, or a 
 motion for the reduction of the salary of a Minister 
 were carried, it would mean disapproval of the policv 
 covered by the vote, or imply discontent with the entire 
 administration of that Minister ; and as the responsibility 
 of all the members of the Government is collective and 
 not individual, a hostile amendment would bring about 
 even in the latter case not only the resignation of 
 the Minister specially attacked, but the resignation of 
 the entire Cabinet. The late Liberal Administration 
 resigned owing to the success of a motion in Committee 
 of Supply to reduce by dPIOO the salary of the Secretary 
 for War. 
 
 But exciting and momentous events of this kind are 
 rare in Committee of Supply. That stage of Parlia- 
 mentary business is usually dull. What a curious notion 
 the stranger fresh from his native heath in the far west 
 or north, and ignorant of Parliamentary habits, cus- 
 toms, and procedures present in the gallery for the first 
 time on a night the House is in Committee of Supply, 
 must form of the greatest Legislature in the world. He 
 cranes his neck as far over the high barrier in front of 
 him as those lynx-eyed attendants in evening dress, with
 
 VOTING SUPPLIES IN THE COMMONS 391 
 
 wide gilt chains on their breasts, will permit him, and 
 sees what ? Well, not much more than empty benches. 
 He observes the table quite plainly, but he cannot see 
 on the benches to its immediate right and left any 
 members answering to the portraits and newspaper 
 sketches of the great men of the House. Now that he 
 looks more sharply, he is amazed to find that the 
 Speakers Chair is empty ; that a gentleman in ordinary 
 attire and without a wig sits at the head of the table. 
 It cannot be the Clerk, surely. And where is the mace ? 
 His eyes are not even gratified by a sight of that awful 
 emblem, for it lies perdu under the table until the 
 Speaker comes back again. Yes ; deserted and unpic- 
 turesque is the House on nights when Supplies, or the 
 money to grease the wheels and supply steam for that 
 mammoth machine, the British Empire, is being voted 
 by the Commons. 
 
 But occasionally the proceedings in Committee of 
 Supply are not without the elements of entertainment. 
 Notwithstanding the changes which are being continu- 
 ously wrought in the personnel of the House by death, 
 resignation, and the ill-fortunes of General Elections, 
 there are always in the House a number of members who 
 delight to burrow into the three ponderous volumes 
 each with its couple of thousand pages crammed with 
 figures issued every year, containing the Estimates for 
 the Army, Navy, and Civil Service respectively ; and 
 passing by items of expenditure millions in amount, call 
 attention, in Committee of Supply, to out-of-the-way 
 and insignificant, but none the less interesting, demands 
 on the public. 
 
 The Civil Service Estimates afford the best oppor- 
 tunity for this sort of industry on the part of this
 
 392 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 section of the members of the House. For instance, 
 when the Chairman informs the Committee in the usual 
 form that " the question is that a sum not exceeding 
 1 7,062 be granted to her Majesty for the maintenance 
 and repair of the palaces in the personal occupation of her 
 Majesty " (every vote, by the way, is in theory granted 
 to her Majesty), a member may rise and ask the Pre- 
 sident of the Board of Works, to whose department this 
 vote belongs, why it is the ancient office of rat-catcher 
 to the royal palaces is not abolished. The abolition of 
 the office, however, would only mean a saving of 18 a. 
 year to the State, 8 being paid to the rat-catcher of 
 Buckingham Palace, and <*10 to the rat-catcher of 
 Windsor Palace. Then somebody discovers that in the 
 Home Office 25 a year is paid overtime, to second 
 division clerks to weed out valueless papers in the 
 pigeon-holes of the department. Another member calls 
 attention to the big sum of money spent every year to 
 supply newspapers to the various Government offices. 
 Here are a few of the entries under this head : Treasury 
 150 ; Home Office 95 : Foreign Office 160 ; Privy 
 Council 80 ; Secretary for Scotland 40 ; and Irish 
 Office 190. One of the duties of private secretaries is 
 to run through the newspapers, and to draw the atten- 
 tion of Ministers to anything affecting them or their 
 offices. What an acquaintance with the news of the 
 day and public opinion these gentlemen must have ! 
 
 On the Treasury Bench sits the Minister in charge of 
 the particular State department for which the vote 
 under discussion is required. He is supplied with a 
 small oblong box, known as a " despatch box," filled 
 with papers, notes, and memorandums of various kinds, 
 to assist him in answering any questions that may be
 
 VOTING SUPPLIES IN THE COMMONS 393 
 
 put to him in regard to his office. On the votes for the 
 army amounting to over seventeen millions, and the 
 votes for the navy which exceed fourteen millions, 
 questions affecting each service are discussed, and often- 
 times abuses and grievances are so effectively exposed 
 that their removal rapidly follows. In like manner on 
 the votes for 231,465 for the salaries of the officers of 
 both Houses of Parliament, and the maintenance of the 
 buildings ; 97,000 for the Home Office ; .70,000 for 
 the Foreign Office; 43,000 for the Colonial Office; 
 691,000 for Foreign and Colonial Services ; ,170,000 
 for the Board of Trade; 166,000 for the Local 
 Government Board ; 1,971,421 for the Civil depart- 
 ments of Ireland ; 3,698,000 for Law and Justice ; 
 9,388,000 for Education, Science, and Art ; and 
 12,778,000 for the Revenue departments (of which 
 close on ten millions go to the Post and Telegraph 
 Offices) ; besides numbers of other votes, questions con- 
 cerning our interests at home and abroad are fully 
 discussed. 
 
 But there is one interesting vote in regard to which 
 a question is never asked in Committee of Supply. This 
 is the Secret Service vote. The supply for this service 
 varies from 30,000 to 50,000 a year. But in addi- 
 tion to this annual vote by Parliament, a sum of 
 10,000 is payable every year out of the Consolidated 
 Fund for " Home Secret Service." The money for the 
 Secret Service is entirely expended by the Foreign 
 Office and the Home Office. A record of persons in 
 receipt of Secret Service money is kept at both offices ; 
 but no information as to the expenditure of the money 
 would be given to Parliament by Ministers, on the 
 ground that it would be inimical to the public service.
 
 394 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 " The object aimed at," Mr. Gladstone once said, "is to 
 confine the knowledge of it to the smallest possible 
 number of persons, and having thus concentrated respon- 
 sibility, to trust to their honour and discretion."" 
 
 The business of Supply is extended over a large part 
 of the Session. By a resolution adopted in 1896, on the 
 motion of Mr. A. J. Balfour, twenty days are allotted 
 to Committee of Supply ; but an additional three days 
 may be allowed in the discretion of the Leader of the 
 House. As the votes are agreed to in Committee, 
 they are reported to the House, when, as on the report 
 stage of a Bill, their proposals may be again debated and 
 rejected or adopted. Sometimes what is called " a vote 
 on account, 11 which is usually for a large amount, is taken 
 by the Government, to enable them to carry on the ser- 
 vices of the country until the regular votes have been 
 adopted. 
 
 The department of the Exchequer and Audit, which 
 is presided over by the Comptroller and Auditor-General 
 a permanent official exercises control over the receipt, 
 custody, and issue of the public revenue. Under the 
 authority of the " Supply resolutions " of the House of 
 Commons, the Comptroller and Auditor-General to 
 whom they are sent direct from Parliament grants to 
 the Treasury a general credit on the Consolidated Fund 
 in the Bank of England. The Treasury, however, does 
 not pay over to the various departments the money 
 appropriated to their services directly it is voted bv 
 Parliament. In fact, the money does not reach the 
 departments at all through the Treasury. Armed with 
 the warrants issued by the Comptroller and Auditor- 
 General, the Treasury directs the Bank of England to 
 place the money to the account of the Paymaster-
 
 VOTING SUPPLIES IN THE COMMONS 395 
 
 General, who acts as the banker of the departments. 
 Payments are made by the Paymaster-General only 
 against orders issued upon him by the depart- 
 ments. These orders are like bank cheques, and the 
 books of the Paymaster-General are kept in the same 
 manner as those of a banker that is, each department 
 is credited with the amounts received on its account 
 from the Treasury, and is debited with the various 
 sums paid on the orders or cheques it issues. 
 
 Each department has the power only of spending 
 during any year the amount voted for its service. If 
 the funds voted by Parliament for the purpose should 
 prove insufficient, owing to a miscalculation in the 
 estimated revenue, or in the estimated expenditure, the 
 Treasury can raise the amount necessary to cover the 
 deficit by the issue of Bills on the security of the Ex- 
 chequer, which are subsequently redeemed by means of 
 supplementary votes of supply granted by Parliament. 
 On the other hand, should a department spend less than 
 the amount voted for its service, the unexpended balance 
 has to be returned to the Exchequer at the end of the 
 financial year ; into which each department has also to 
 pay any amount it may have received from any other 
 source than its " vote,"" as, for instance, the proceeds of 
 the sale of old stores. 
 
 The amount of taxation each year being thus calcu- 
 lated to provide for the expenditure which it is estimated 
 will be required during that year and no more, it may 
 be asked how are new and unforeseen demands on the 
 national exchequer met. Has the Executive to wait for 
 another year to receive the money from Parliament ? 
 Two permanent reserve funds have been created to 
 enable the Executive to meet expenses indispensably
 
 396 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 necessary to the public service, but not previously pro- 
 vided for arising during the Parliamentary recess. 
 One is the "Treasury Chest Fund,"" consisting of 
 <*!, 000,000, for unexpected public services at home and 
 abroad ; the other is the " Civil Contingencies Fund," 
 limited to <! 20,000, to meet unforeseen deficiencies in 
 the ordinary departmental votes. Any money advanced 
 to the Treasury from either of these funds must be repaid 
 by a special vote of supply when Parliament again 
 assembles. This is the only attempt made by the State 
 to set aside funds to meet the " rainy day " mentioned 
 in the proverb. 
 
 The passing of the Appropriation Act at the end of 
 each Session is the consummation of the control which 
 Parliament exercises over the public expenditure. In 
 this Act are consolidated all the votes passed in Com- 
 mittee of Supply, and its purpose is to insure that each 
 vote is appropriated to the objects for which it is 
 granted by Parliament. But, nevertheless, it cannot be 
 said that there is a rigorous supervision of the Estimates 
 by the House of Commons. Indeed, a real and search- 
 ing criticism of the votes in Committee of Supply is 
 not possible in the circumstances of Parliamentary 
 life, and happily it is hardly required. The necessary 
 vigilant control of the spending of the national 
 revenue is provided by other means. The business of 
 the Audit department of the Exchequer is to examine 
 the accounts and vouchers of the expenditure of the 
 various branches of the public service. But that is not 
 all. Every Session the House appoints a Public 
 Accounts Committee consisting of experienced and 
 clear-headed business men, and men of the greatest 
 weight and authority upon financial questions whose
 
 VOTING SUPPLIES IN THE COMMONS 397 
 
 duty it is to supervise the work of the Audit depart- 
 ment. The system by which the public funds of the 
 Realm is administered is indeed beyond suspicion. 
 Under it, extravagance not to speak of peculation is 
 impossible, and all the money is spent on the objects for 
 which it is voted by Parliament. That no doubt is the 
 reason why the sums asked for by Ministers are so readily 
 granted year after year by the House of Commons.
 
 398 
 
 CHAPTER XXII 
 PRIVATE BILL LEGISLATION 
 
 A PRIVATE Bill is a Bill in which a company or a local 
 authority seeks for powers to carry out a commercial 
 undertaking or a social scheme involving interference 
 with public rights or the rights of individuals. The 
 State alone can abrogate public or private rights. If 
 therefore, a municipal body, or a company desires to 
 build or extend a railway, to provide a local community 
 with gas or water, to lay down a tramway, to open a 
 cemetery, to construct a system of sewerage, to erect muni- 
 cipal buildings, to make a canal, to provide harbour and 
 dock accommodation, or execute any other work which 
 affects public rights, or private proprietary interests, 
 it must embody its scheme in a Bill and submit it, for 
 consideration, to Parliament, which alone possesses and 
 can alone confer on another body, the power, for instance, 
 of acquiring land compulsorily, subject to proper com- 
 pensation to the owner ; and no step can legally be 
 taken by the promoters in the execution of the scheme 
 until that Bill has passed through Parliament. 
 
 Every Private Bill has to go through precisely the 
 same legislative stages in both Houses of Parliament as 
 a Public Bill, or a Bill dealing with a matter of public 
 policy in which the whole community is interested. It 
 must be presented in either House, and read a first time,
 
 PRIVATE BILL LEGISLATION .999 
 
 pass its second reading, be committed, or referred to a 
 Committee for the consideration of its details, reported 
 to the House ; read a third time ; then go up to the 
 Lords, if it originated in the Commons, or down to the 
 Commons, if it originated in the Lords where it must 
 again go through all these stages, and finally receive the 
 royal assent. Nevertheless, there are certain marked 
 distinctions between procedure on a Private Bill and 
 procedure on a Public Bill. The proceedings in Com- 
 mittee on Public Bills is of a purely legislative character, 
 whether the Committee be a Committee of the whole 
 House sitting in the House itself, or a Grand Committee 
 meeting in one of the Committee-rooms upstairs. But a 
 Committee on a Private Bill always sits upstairs and 
 exercises judicial as well as legislative functions. There 
 is also a striking difference in the manner in which 
 Public Bills and Private Bills are presented to Parlia- 
 ment. A Public Bill is introduced in either House 
 without any preliminary proceedings outside. But 
 under the Standing Orders of Parliament, before any 
 Private Bill can be presented in either House, a petition 
 for such Bill, together with plans and estimates of the 
 proposed scheme or undertaking must be deposited by 
 the Parliamentary agent of the promoters in the Private 
 Bill Office at the Palace of Westminster. Copies of 
 these documents must also be sent to the Clerk of the 
 Crown of any locality affected by the works, and 
 due notice must be given, in the local newspaper, to all 
 persons affected, such as the owners and occupiers of the 
 land proposed to be compulsorily acquired under the 
 powers of the Bill. Each House has a counsel known 
 as the " Examiner of Private Bills," whose duty it is to 
 see that the Standing Orders have been complied with
 
 400 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 by the promoters of these undertakings. These gentle- 
 men hold public sittings together at Westminster, about 
 a fortnight before the time for the meeting of Parlia- 
 ment, to hear the Parliamentary agents of the interested 
 parties the promoters and opponents of the scheme 
 as to whether or not there has been due and proper 
 compliance with the Standing Orders. 
 
 Parliamentary agents are usually, but not necessarily, 
 solicitors. Any person, save a member of Parliament 
 (a term which includes Lords and Commons) or an official 
 of either House may become a Parliamentary agent, by 
 writing his name in the register of agents in the Private 
 Bill Office, and by entering into a bond for 500 for 
 the payment of the Private Bill fees, and for the due 
 observation of the declaration he is also required to 
 make, to obey the rules, orders, regulations, and prac- 
 tices of Parliament. 
 
 If the examiners find that the Standing Orders have 
 been observed the Private Bill may be brought into 
 either House forthwith ; but if they report a breach of 
 the Standing Orders, such as insufficiency of notice, or 
 inaccuracy in the plans, the matter is referred to two 
 committees one appointed by each House at the com- 
 mencement of every session and known as the " Com- 
 mittees on Standing Orders." These Committees decide, 
 between them, on written statements supplied by the 
 promoters and opponents of the scheme, whether or not 
 the promoters should be allowed to proceed with their 
 Bill, and if so, under what, if any, conditions. 
 
 The next stage in the progress of a Private Bill is the 
 selection of the House through which it shall first pass, 
 for, as I have said, it must go through both before it 
 becomes an Act of Parliament. This question is settled
 
 PRIVATE BILL LEGISLATION 401 
 
 by the Chairman of Ways and Means in the House 
 of Commons, and the Chairman of Committees in 
 the House of Lords, who hold a conference at the com- 
 mencement of every Session, and with a view to the 
 equalisation, as far as possible, of the Private Bill legis- 
 lation of the two Houses, determine in which House the 
 respective Private Bills for the Session should be first 
 considered. 
 
 Let us now follow a Private Bill in its course through 
 the House of Commons. A Public Bill is introduced by 
 a Minister or unofficial member (after leave has been 
 given), walking with it from the Bar to the table and 
 presenting it to the Clerk. But a Private Bill, after the 
 elaborate preliminary proceedings have been gone 
 through, is lodged by the Parliamentary agent in the 
 Private Bill Office, and printed copies of it are delivered 
 to the doorkeeper of the House for the use of members. 
 Every Private Bill is endorsed or " backed " by the 
 names of two members, at the request of constituents or 
 the promoters ; but as a rule they have nothing further 
 to do with its progress through the House. All notices 
 in relation to the Bill which appear on the " Orders of 
 the Day, 11 except notices of opposition, are given by the 
 Parliamentary agent of the promoters. It is he who 
 fixes the day for the first, second, or third reading. But 
 as no stage of a Bill, private or public, can be passed 
 except by a motion made and put in the usual manner 
 from the Chair, one member of the House generally an 
 old and respected member undertakes the duty of 
 moving these motions in regard to Private Bills. 
 
 The first thing the House of Commons does after 
 prayers, with which each sitting opens, is to proceed 
 with any Private Bills that may be on the paper for
 
 402 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 consideration. The normal asjject of the Chamber at 
 this hour is empty and listless. Half a dozen members or 
 so are scattered over the benches at each side. The respon- 
 sibility of Ministers in regard to public legislation does 
 not extend to Private Bills. Ministers, indeed, abstain 
 from any interference in such business. The only occu- 
 pant of the Treasury bench is the obliging unofficial 
 member, who, to the great convenience of the House, as 
 well as of the parties interested in the Private Bills, has 
 undertaken to see these measures through the different 
 stages. The proceedings are purely formal. The 
 Speaker rises from his chair and says " The Clerk will 
 now proceed to read the titles of Private Bills. 11 Some- 
 times there may be six or eight such Bills on the paper 
 at other times only one or two in various stages of 
 advancement. But be the list long or short it is gene- 
 rally gone through in a few minutes. The Clerk read- 
 ing from the " Orders of the Day, 11 says " The Essex 
 Railway Extension Bill second reading; 11 the member 
 on the Treasury Bench lifts his hat to indicate that he 
 moves the Order, and the voice of Mr. Speaker is again 
 heard, " As many as are of that opinion will say ' Aye 1 ; 
 the contrary, * No. 1 "" No one responds to the Speaker's 
 invitation. Not a solitary " Aye " or " No " is heard 
 from the few uninterested and inattentive members pre- 
 sent. But, nevertheless, the Speaker imperturbably 
 declares he thinks the " Ayes 11 have it, and then pro- 
 nounces the irrevocable decision, " The ' Ayes 1 have it. 11 
 And so on through the entire list. The Clerk reads the 
 title and stage of each Bill ; the occupant of the Trea- 
 sury Bench raises his hat ; the Speaker declares the order 
 passed. The " strangers 1 " in the public galleries wonder 
 what this conversation between the Clerk and the Speaker
 
 PRIVATE BILL LEGISLATION 403 
 
 may be about, and strain their ears in a vain attempt to 
 catch its purport. The reporters in the Press gallery, 
 generally take no notice of the proceedings or only men- 
 tion in their reports the Private Bills that are of local 
 interest to their newspapers. 
 
 But Private Bills are not always disposed of in a few 
 minutes in this drowsy and formal manner. Some 
 closely affect for good or ill the well-being and con- 
 venience of large masses of the people ; others involve 
 questions of political policy. These Private Bills, 
 arousing, as they naturally do, public feeling and party 
 passion, are debated for hours with animation on their 
 different stages in the House. The progress of the aver- 
 age Private Bill through the House is, however, calm and 
 uneventful, and it is only when, after the second reading 
 by which the House has affirmed the general principle 
 or expediency of the measure, it is referred to a Select 
 Committee, sitting upstairs, that it finds itself in troubled 
 waters. 
 
 Before we follow the Private Bill upstairs, let us see 
 how the Select Committee, which will decide its fate, 
 has been appointed. A small body of the oldest and 
 most experienced members of the House, representative 
 of all parties, is appointed every Session to select the 
 Committees on Private Bills. They are known as the 
 " Committee of Selection. r> A Select Committee on a 
 Private Bill consists of three members and a chairman. 
 Every member selected to serve on such a Committee 
 must fill up and sign a blank form declaring that his 
 constituents have no local interest, and that he himself 
 has no personal interest, in the undertaking which is the 
 subject of the Private Bill ; and that he will not vote on 
 any question which may arise before the Committee
 
 404 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 without having heard and attended to the evidence. 
 Service on a Select Committee is oftentimes uncongenial 
 and irksome, and a member selected for the duty occa- 
 sionally tries to shirk it ; but he is not allowed to do so 
 without sufficient reason. Any member failing to attend, 
 without a proper excuse, a Committee for which he has 
 been selected, is reported to the House by the Committee 
 of Selection. He is then required to attend in his place 
 in the House and explain his absence from the Committee. 
 If the explanation is not considered satisfactory by the 
 House, he is ordered to attend the Committee ; and if he 
 should still prove contumacious, he is brought to the 
 Bar and severely censured by the Speaker, or sent to the 
 Clock Tower, as the House may direct. 
 
 In 1860, Sir John (then Mr.) Pope Hennessy was 
 reported to the House for disobedience to the summons 
 of the Committee of Selection to serve on a railway 
 committee. He was ordered to attend in his place in 
 the House and give an explanation. Two days later 
 the Speaker announced that he had received from the 
 hon. member, who was in Cork, a telegram which ran : 
 "Railway committee had escaped my recollection. I 
 most respectfully apologise to the House. I hasten to 
 London without delay. 11 Next day Mr. Pope Hennessy 
 appeared in his place. His explanation was accepted, 
 he was forgiven; but he was directed to attend the 
 Committee forthwith. In 1846, another Irish member, 
 Mr. Smith O'Brien who two years later was sentenced 
 at Clonmel to be hanged, drawn, and quartered for 
 treason felony, but was subsequently reprieved refused 
 to serve on a Select Committee as a protest against the 
 Irish policy of the Government of the time. He was 
 committed to the custody of the Serjeant-at-Arms,
 
 PRIVATE BILL LEGISLATION 405 
 
 and was detained in prison at Westminster for as 
 long as three weeks before the House ordered his 
 discharge. 
 
 Members of the Administration do not act on these 
 Select Committees ; ex-Ministers are also excused ; and 
 professional men, such as doctors and lawyers, or men 
 actively engaged in business of any kind, are rarely 
 called upon to serve. It therefore follows that most of 
 the members who perform this unostentatious, sometimes 
 wearisome and distasteful, but always important and 
 useful work, are the men of leisure and the silent un- 
 official members who are rarely seen by the public on the 
 larger stage which the House affords. 
 
 To such a Committee so selected and so composed a 
 Private Bill, if it be opposed that is to say, if after the 
 first reading a petition against it has been lodged in the 
 Private Bill Office, in which the petitioners pray to be 
 heard by themselves, their counsel, or their agents is 
 referred for the consideration of its details. The pro- 
 cedure before the Select Committee partakes more of a 
 judicial than of a legislative character; or perhaps it 
 would be more accurate to say that it is partly judicial 
 and partly legislative. The members of the Committee 
 first sit as judges. They hear evidence on oath on 
 behalf of the promoters and opponents of the Bill ; they 
 listen to speeches of counsel ; and finally they adjudicate 
 upon the merits of the undertaking. If they find against 
 the Bill if they decide to report to the House " that 
 the preamble has not been proved Vl the Bill is thrown 
 out. But if they declare that the preamble, or 
 introductory portion of the Bill, in which its reasons 
 and intentions are set out, has been proved, they then 
 proceed, in their legislative capacity, to go through the
 
 406 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 clauses of the Bill, and approve, amend, or reject as 
 they think proper. 
 
 The rooms in which the Select Committee sit are oft' 
 a magnificent corridor which extends on the third storey 
 along the entire river front of the Palace of Westminster. 
 Access to the corridor is obtained from the Central Hall 
 by a broad flight of stairs. On days the Committees arc 
 sitting the Lords 1 from 11 to 4, the Commons' from 
 12 to 4 the long corridor presents a scene of bustle and 
 excitement. It is thronged with parties interested in the 
 Private Bills, and counsel in wig and gown pass to and 
 fro from one committee-room to another. Each room 
 has a distinctive number. One of them, "Committee 
 Room 15," in which were held the famous meetings of 
 the Irish Parliamentary party in December 1891, which 
 culminated in the deposition of Mr. Parnell, will always 
 be an apartment of great historical interest. There are 
 two entrances to each room, one for " Members Only," 
 the other the " Public Entrance ; " and at each door 
 also (at which a policeman stands on guard) is a framed 
 announcement, in large letters, of the name of the Select 
 Committee sitting within. 
 
 Let us enter one of the nineteen rooms. It is, like all 
 the others, a large and lofty apartment, with windows 
 overlooking the terrace and commanding a view of the 
 river. A table, horse-shoe in shape, fills nearly half the 
 room. The chairman occupies a raised seat at the top 
 of the arc, and his colleagues sit at each side. At a 
 small separate table close at hand is a clerk of the 
 Private Bill Office, who keeps minutes of the proceed- 
 ings; but the evidence given before the Committee is 
 fully taken by an official stenographer, who sits at a 
 table inside the half-circle and close to the witness-
 
 PRIVATE BILL LEGISLATION 407 
 
 chair. At the chord of the arc rims a long table for 
 the accommodation of counsel, the Parliamentary 
 agent, and the local solicitors, on behalf both of the 
 promoters and the opponents of the Bill. Behind them 
 stand the witnesses and others interested in the Bill, 
 with occasionally a few members of the general public, 
 who are being shown over the Palace of Westminster by 
 members of Parliament, and some newspaper reporters 
 are at work at a table close to the windows. The walls 
 are generally hung with huge maps showing the route of 
 the proposed railway, canal, or tramway, or plans of 
 whatever scheme may be under consideration, with the 
 aid of which one of the local agents, provided with a 
 long pointer, makes clear for the Committee the evidence 
 of the witness under examination or cross-examination 
 by counsel. 
 
 The witnesses, it may be mentioned here, are brought 
 up by the parties interested. As a rule, the prospect of 
 big fees, liberal expenses, and a pleasant holiday in 
 London secures the attendance of witnesses. But if 
 these inducements to give evidence should fail in the 
 case of a person whose testimony, in the opinion of the 
 Committee, is essential to the inquiry, he is reported to 
 the House, and if extreme measures are deemed necessary 
 to compel his attendance, Mr. Speaker issues to the 
 Serjeant-at-Arms a warrant for his arrest. 
 
 AVhen the interests involved in a Bill are immense 
 such, for instance, as those that were affected by the 
 Manchester Ship Canal Bill the array of counsel at 
 each side is large and distinguished. The Parliamentary 
 Bar, as it is called, is a distinct branch of the legal pro- 
 fession, at which a number of specialists in the law 
 relating to Private Bills practise exclusively. The fees
 
 408 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 to counsel at the Parliamentary Bar are large, but 
 probably not larger than the fees frequently paid to 
 counsel who practise before other legal tribunals. A 
 brief fee of from 300 guineas to 500 guineas, and 
 occasionally even 1000 guineas, is paid to eminent 
 counsel, according to the importance of the proposed 
 undertaking, and the ordinary refresher ranges from 35 
 to 50 guineas a day. Indeed, the chairman of the 
 Manchester Ship Canal stated in a speech delivered 
 during the protracted proceedings, with varying fortunes, 
 in relation to that gigantic scheme, before six or eight 
 different Select Committees of both Houses, during four 
 or five Sessions, that the promoters paid 30 guineas per 
 hour (or 120 guineas per day of four hours) for each 
 hour the Select Committee sat on the Bill, to four 
 counsel, only one of whom was present at any time in 
 the Committee room. These counsel were retained by 
 parties in other Private Bills which were simultaneously 
 under investigation before other Select Committees ; and 
 though they were only able to give a little time to each 
 Private Bill, or else each devoted himself exclusively to 
 one Bill, they were probably paid fees equally as big by 
 all their clients. 
 
 Parliament does not encourage the appearance of 
 counsel before Select Committees. This is shown in 
 the scale of Committee charges fixed by both Houses. 
 Promoters of a Private Bill before a Select Committee 
 of the House of Commons, pay a charge of 5 per day 
 if they appear by agent alone, but if they are represented 
 by counsel they pay 10 per day. Opponents, however, 
 pay only 2 per day, whether they appear by counsel 
 or by agent. The charges of Select Committees of the 
 Lords are considerably different ; but they exhibit in
 
 PRIVATE BILL LEGISLATION 409 
 
 even a more marked degree discouragement of the 
 employment of counsel. In the first place, an order for 
 leave for a counsel to appear before a Select Committee 
 of the Lords must be obtained, and for this order a 
 guinea is charged. For the first day's appearance of 
 counsel for the promoters, 7 14*. is charged, and for 
 every subsequent day 3 10,9. On the other hand, if 
 the promoters appear only by agent they have not to 
 pay any Committee charges. Opponents represented by 
 counsel pay 10 15s. per day for the first and second 
 davs, and 3 10*. for every subsequent day, except for 
 the last day, when the charge is 4> 10*. But if 
 opponents appear only by agent they pay ^3 3s. for the 
 first and second days, and 1 for every subsequent day. 
 In the Lords' 1 Committees the charges on opponents are 
 much higher than the charges on promoters, while, as we 
 have seen, it is the other way about in the Committees 
 of the House of Commons. Evidently the Lords think 
 opposition to Private Bills ought to be repressed ; the 
 Commons, that it ought to be encouraged ; but what- 
 ever their difference of opinion in this respect, the 
 Houses unite in adding to the expensiveness for both 
 promoters and opponents of the luxury of the advocacy 
 of counsel. 
 
 In addition to these Committee charges, promoters of 
 Private Bills have to pay fees, which differ substantially 
 in each House. In the House of Commons the minimum 
 fees are 5 for the presentation of a Bill ; and 15 
 each for the first and second readings, the report, and 
 the third reading. The fees increase according to the 
 amount of money to be raised or expended under the 
 Bill. If the sum be ^100,000, and under ^500,000, 
 twice the amount of such fees is charged ; between
 
 410 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 ,500,000 and 1,000,000, three times; and over 
 1,000,000, four times the amount of such minimum 
 fees. The maximum fees on a Private Bill in the House 
 of Commons is therefore 260. In the House of Lords 
 the scale of fees is quite different. For the first reading 
 of all Private Bills a fee of 5 5.9. must be paid ; the fee 
 for the second reading ranges from 27, the lowest, to 
 135, the highest, according to the nature of the Bill, 
 and the fee for the third reading is from 10 to 15. 
 Parliament, therefore, derives a substantial revenue from 
 the fees and charges on Private Bills. The aggregate 
 sum for the two Houses reaches 60,000 a year on the 
 average ; but while the fees of the Commons go into the 
 Consolidated Fund, those of the Lords are placed to the 
 credit of the " Invested Fee Fund," out of which the 
 retired allowances or pensions of officers of the House 
 are paid. Each House has an official known as the 
 Receiver of Private Bill fees, whose .special duty it is to 
 take care that these fees are paid by the Parliamentary 
 agents. If an agent becomes a defaulter in this respect, 
 his name is erased from the roll in. the Private Bill 
 Office. 
 
 But let us return to the Committee room to see the 
 proceedings before the Select Committee. The voice of 
 counsel is always heard here, examining, cross-examining, 
 or arguing, despite the efforts of Parliament to suppress 
 him. Sometimes the proceedings have that intellectual 
 interest for the casual spectator which is aroused by the 
 contradictory statements of eminent experts on both 
 sides of a question ; by a clever cross-examination of 
 these professional witnesses, or by a passage at arms 
 between opposing counsel. But on the whole it is dull 
 work except to those interested in the scheme. The
 
 PRIVATE BILL LEGISLATION 411 
 
 inquiries are often protracted and tedious. No wonder, 
 then, that members of Parliament, as a rule, desire to 
 escape nomination on these Select Committees. There 
 is a popular belief that they are paid five guineas a day 
 for their attendance, but it has no foundation in fact. 
 The only return they get for their services is the privi- 
 lege if it be a privilege of being able to secure a seat 
 in the House without having to attend at prayers ; and 
 it is doubtful whether many of them look upon that as a 
 compensation for the personal inconvenience and dis- 
 comfort of having to turn up in the Committee room at 
 12 o'clock, after, perhaps, a late sitting of the House, 
 and listen for four hours to long statements of dull facts 
 and figures, and dry technical details. 
 
 Richard Cobden was appointed on a Railway Com- 
 mittee in the Session of 1845, and the letters he wrote to 
 his wife and brother show the exacting nature and the 
 tediousness of the service. He writes to his wife on 
 June 19 : 
 
 To-day we have been bored with a three hours' speech 
 from a counsel who would have nothing else to do if he 
 released us from our confinement. 
 
 Again, on June 24 : 
 
 There never was such a case of petty persecution as I 
 am enduring in this Railway Committee. We have been 
 nearly five weeks sitting, hearing witnesses and listening to 
 the tedious harangues of counsel about a lot of paltry lines 
 among the little towns and villages in Norfolk and Suffolk. 
 I thought we should have got to the end of our work in a 
 fortnight or three weeks, but now we are threatened with 
 another week or ten days. And the great misfortune is 
 that we have no power to put any restraint upon the
 
 412 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 tongues of the counsel, who are paid in proportion to the 
 length of time they can waste. 
 
 At the same time Cobden was groaning over his mis- 
 fortunes to his brother, who was communicating to him 
 pressing and unpleasant business affairs : 
 
 It is of no use you writing bad news to me. I can't help 
 it while here. 
 
 On May 26, he writes : 
 
 I am fixed in the Norfolk Committee to-day, and do not 
 feel the least chance of being released for a week, and it 
 may be a month. And for this there is no help, for if I 
 were to leave for twenty-four hours the Serjeant-at-Arms 
 would be after me. 
 
 June 6. I am sorry to say it is impossible for me to come 
 down even for a day. Our Committee have determined to 
 sit on Saturdays, and the rule of the House precludes me 
 from being absent even for an hour. God only knows when 
 this odious Committee will come to a close. 
 
 June 19- Your letters keep me on the tenter-hooks, for 
 I know not in what extremity you may be placed. I am 
 in the same predicament as ever. The Committee will in 
 all probability last a week more. To-day we have been 
 treated to a three hours' speech by a counsel upon a mere 
 fraction of the group. What makes it more difficult to 
 escape is that the Committee does not give a decision on 
 any part until we have heard the whole, and consequently 
 nobody not acquainted with the evidence already taken 
 could step in to fill my place. Sir Benjamin Hall, very 
 luckily for him, was pitched from his horse on his head the 
 second day of our meeting, and he was excused from 
 further attendance, and as we have nobody else in his 
 place, and as four are a quorum, we cannot proceed to 
 business in the absence of one.
 
 PRIVATE BILL LEGISLATION 413 
 
 Three members now form a quorum, and therefore 
 only one member can be absent at a time. If two 
 members remain away the sitting is suspended for an 
 hour ; if at the end of that time one of them does not 
 turn up, the Committee is adjourned till next day, and 
 unless a reasonable excuse can be given, the name of the 
 absentees are reported to the House. The presence of 
 the members in the Committee room is therefore essen- 
 tial. Whether they closely follow the evidence is another 
 question. On the chairman generally a man of ex- 
 perience, who has been a long time in the House, and is 
 familiar with the procedure of the Committee on Private 
 Bills falls most of the burden of the work and respon- 
 sibility. He certainly gives all his attention to the 
 proceedings. He listens to the arguments and weighs 
 the evidence. But the other members, unless they are 
 most industrious and conscientious, succumb to the pre- 
 vailing influence of dulness and lassitude, and only keep 
 themselves awake by dealing with the big bundle of 
 correspondence which awaits every member of Parlia- 
 ment however mute and inglorious he may be every 
 day that he appears at Westminster. The monotony 
 of the proceedings is not broken even by an adjourn- 
 ment for luncheon. A waiter brings a member on his 
 order a sandwich, or a few biscuits with a glass of milk 
 or a bottle of ginger beer, and this modest, temperate 
 fare is partaken of in the room. Mr. Disraeli once said 
 that a member of Parliament who desired to be a 
 success in the House, should live on Blue Books and 
 biscuit. Of all our representatives the members of 
 Select Committees on Private Bills more closely attain 
 to that ideally heroic state of existence. But, after all, 
 there is some little relief to the tedium of the sitting.
 
 414 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 At 3 o'clock one of the messengers of the House pops 
 his head into the room and shouts : " Mr. Speaker at 
 prayers."" The members of the Committee do not how- 
 ever join the Speaker at devotions, but should a division 
 take place in the House during the remaining hour 
 the Committee sits, the members jump up at the first 
 sound of the electric bells, rush headlong from the room 
 and down the staircase leading to the Legislative 
 Chamber, and knowing little or nothing, perhaps, of 
 the issue which hangs on the division, pass into the 
 lobby pointed out to them by their respective Whips. 
 After this touching display of devotion to party, the 
 members of the Committee return to their room, and 
 business is taken up at the point at which it was inter- 
 rupted by the summons of the division bell. 
 
 The chief question which a Select Committee on a 
 Private Bill has to decide, is whether the undertaking 
 is for the public benefit. Remuneration for the capital 
 invested, which in most cases is the primary object 
 of the promoters, is a minor consideration with the 
 Committee. " Do the advantages which the scheme 
 offers to the public justify the interference with private 
 rights which its execution involves ? " That and that 
 only is the question for the Committee, and when the 
 evidence is concluded, and counsel on each side hau- 
 been heard, on that issue it deliberates with closed doors. 
 If it decides the question in the negative, the parties 
 are called in and the chairman simply says : " The pre- 
 amble of the Bill has not been proved to our satisfaction." 
 That is all. A Select Committee on a Private Bill 
 never gives reasons for any decision at which it may 
 arrive. If the Committee decides that the preamble of 
 the Bill has been proved, the clauses are then taken up
 
 PRIVATE BILL LEGISLATION 415 
 
 and gone through one after the other, as in Committee 
 of the whole House. Amendments may be moved, or 
 new clauses submitted, on behalf of both promoters and 
 opponents ; but, of course, all questions are decided by 
 a majority of the members of the Committee present. 
 The chairman votes in every division, and if the numbers 
 are equal he also gives a casting vote. It is the interest 
 of the community, or the public benefit, that the Com- 
 mittee keeps in view in deciding all questions. It limits 
 the amount of taxes, rates, tolls, or fares which the 
 company may charge the public, and even restricts the 
 profits the company may divide amongst the share- 
 holders. 
 
 Having passed successfully through the Committee 
 stage, the Bill is reported to the House of Commons 
 with the minutes of the proceedings before the Select 
 Committee, taken by the clerk ; and, as already described, 
 it is formally read a third time some day, in that calm 
 and placid period of the sitting after prayers. It then 
 goes up to the House of Lords, where somewhat similar 
 experiences await it. Its first reading and second read- 
 ing are generally mere formal stages, but if it embodies 
 an important scheme, such as the Manchester Ship Canal, 
 which its opjxments fight at every point, it is referred to 
 a Select Committee consisting of a chairman and five 
 other peers, appointed as in the Commons, by a Com- 
 mittee of Selection before which the same evidence is 
 given, and the same counsel appear for promoters and 
 opponents a.s before the Select Committee of the House 
 of Commons. The Bill may be rejected by the Select 
 Committee of the Lords. After hearing the evidence 
 they may find that " it is inexpedient to proceed with the 
 Bill " (the form in which the Lords 1 Committee declare
 
 416 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 their judgment), and the Bill is accordingly rejected 
 without, as in the case of the Commons, any reasons 
 being assigned. The experiences of the Manchester Ship 
 Canal Bill, before it finally passed through both Houses, 
 were very curious. In 1883, the Bill was introduced in 
 the House of Commons, and passed successfully through 
 all the stages, including a protracted inquiry extending 
 over thirty-nine days before the Select Committee ; but 
 at the end of another prolonged inquiry before the Select 
 Committee of the House of Lords it was rejected. In 
 the following Session the Bill was first brought into the 
 House of Lords. It was referred to a Select Committee 
 in the usual course, and this time, after an inquiry which 
 lasted forty-one days, it passed triumphantly through 
 that trying ordeal. After going through all the stages 
 in the Lords, it came down to the Commons, got through 
 its first and second readings in the House, but it came to 
 grief at the end of a twenty-days' 1 inquiry before the 
 Select Committee sitting upstairs. The Bill subse- 
 quently passed through the same weary stages in both 
 Houses, and became law as the existence of the 
 Manchester Ship Canal sufficiently indicates but the 
 early abortive Parliamentary proceedings added <*! 00,000 
 to the expenses of the undertaking, and probably cost 
 the railway companies and corporation which opposed it 
 at least the same figure. 
 
 However, every Private Bill has not to go through a 
 double inquiry before Select Committees of both Houses. 
 It is only an opposed Private Bill that is referred to a 
 Select Committee, and in most cases the opponents, if 
 defeated before the Select Committee of the House in 
 which the Bill originated, accept that decision and do 
 not push their opposition further. As a rule, it is only
 
 PRIVATE BILL LEGISLATION 417 
 
 in the case of an undertaking of great magnitude that 
 the opponents use the second Select Committee as a 
 sort of court of review in regard to the decision of 
 the first. The fact that costs are awarded by Select 
 Committees in certain cases tends to restrain vexatious 
 proceedings on the part of promoters and opponents 
 alike. Having passed, then, through one House of the 
 Legislature, the Private Bill is, in the majority of cases, 
 referred, like an unopposed Bill in all cases, to the 
 Chairman of Committees in the Lords, or to the Chair- 
 man of Ways and Means in the Commons, and the 
 approval of the one or the other, as the case may be, 
 renders the passage of the Bill through its remaining 
 stages easy and expeditious. Nothing now remains but 
 the royal assent. When that is given, as it is in due 
 course, the Private Bill becomes an Act of Parliament. 
 A Private Act is not published among the statutes of 
 the Session ; but the fact that it has been printed by 
 the Queen's printers must be accepted as sufficient 
 evidence that it is an Act by all parties concerned. 
 Every Private Act is, however, enrolled among the 
 records of Parliament. 
 
 To accept a bribe for advancing or defeating a Private 
 Bill is punished by expulsion. To solicit a bribe for 
 such a service is visited with imprisonment. Happilv, 
 cases of the kind are exceedingly rare in our Parlia- 
 mentary annals. The last occurred in 1879. In that 
 year the chairman of a Select Committee which sat to 
 consider the Tower High Level Bridge Bill reported to 
 the House that Mr. C. E. Grissell, a member of the 
 House, had represented to the agents conducting the 
 opposition to the measure that he would control the 
 decision of the Committee and would procure the 
 
 2D
 
 418 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 withdrawal or rejection of the Bill for the sum 
 A solicitor named Ward was involved with Mr. Grissell 
 in the charge. Both were found guilty by the House 
 which, be it remembered, is the " High Court of Parlia- 
 ment" and the Serjeant-at-Arms was ordered to arrest 
 them and bring them to the Bar of the House for 
 judgment. The Serjeant-at-Arms succeeded in arresting 
 Ward. Grissell escaped to Boulogne, whither he was 
 traced by a messenger of the House, but as the warrant 
 of the House runs only within the kingdom, the absconder 
 could not be apprehended. Ward was brought to the 
 Bar of the House and committed to the Clock Tower 
 during the pleasure of the House. However, after a 
 week's imprisonment, he sent a humble petition to the 
 House expressing the deepest contrition for his conduct, 
 and was set at liberty. Grissell returned to London two 
 days before the termination of the Session, when he 
 knew any order of the House for his imprisonment would 
 lapse, and surrendered himself to the Serjeant-at-Arms. 
 He was committed to Newgate on August 13, and was 
 released the next day, when Parliament was prorogued ; 
 but he was informed he would be arrested again under 
 an order of the House in the next Session. When the 
 House assembled in 1880, he expressed his sincere 
 sorrow for his offence, but he was again committed to 
 Newgate for having previously evaded the warrant of 
 the House. His imprisonment terminated, perforce, at 
 the end of the Session. 
 
 Several objections have been advanced, from time to 
 time, against this system of Private Bill legislation. It 
 has been said that the members of Parliament who are 
 nominated on the Select Committees are not qualified by 
 experience and training to act as judges on the matters
 
 PRIVATE BILL LEGISLATION 419 
 
 at issue, and that the decisions of the Select Committees, 
 being founded on no principles, and bound by no rules 
 of practice, are capricious, uncertain, and often contra- 
 dictory. On the other hand, it has been contended that 
 an average share of common-sense is alone sufficient to 
 guide a Select Committee to a proper and just decision 
 on the question of public expediency or policy involved 
 in a Private Bill. But the chief objection to the system 
 seems to be its cost. Lord John Russell, in his "Recol- 
 lections and Suggestions,"" tells us that " the late Mr. 
 Brassey was enabled to construct a railway from Turin 
 to the Alps at no greater expense than was incurred in 
 carrying a Bill through Parliament to sanction the 
 Great Northern Railway of England." " There can be 
 no doubt," he adds, "that the existing legislation by 
 Private Bills is exceedingly cumbrous and expensive; 
 that great funds are wasted by private interests, and in 
 giving fees to lawyers, which are neither conducive to 
 the public good nor advantageous to property."" Many 
 proposals for a reform of the system have been made. 
 It has been suggested (1) that a Joint Committee of 
 both Houses should sit during the autumn and winter 
 months to inquire into the schemes to be submitted to 
 Parliament in the approaching Session ; or (2) that three 
 judges should be appointed to do the work of the Select 
 Committees ; or (3) that a special Government depart- 
 ment should be created for dealing with Private Bills. 
 
 But these proposals of reform have hitherto come to 
 nothing. Any of them that has been submitted to 
 either House has been rejected. Parliament has pre- 
 ferred to retain its hold unimpaired in every respect 
 on Private Bill legislation. That the present system 
 is expensive cannot be denied. The average annual
 
 420 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 expenditure on promoting and opposing Private Bills 
 in Parliament amounts to about ^600,000. But it is 
 doubtful whether any of the alternative schemes would 
 be less expensive than the existing system. Big fees to 
 counsel and expert witnesses form by far the largest 
 items of the expenditure under the system which now 
 exists, and under no possible scheme could the advocacy 
 of lawyers and the evidence of experts be dispensed 
 with. The present system has, on the whole, worked 
 excellently well. During the fifty years of her Majesty's 
 reign, from 1837 to 1887, close on 11,000 Private Bills 
 passed through Parliament. Under these Acts colossal 
 commercial and industrial undertakings have been carried 
 out. The kingdom has been covered with a network of 
 railways and canals; our great cities and towns have 
 been provided with tramways, drainage systems, water, 
 gas, and electric light, promoting, each and all of them, 
 national prosperity, health, and comfort.
 
 421 
 
 CHAPTER XXIII 
 
 THE DISSOLUTION 
 
 EACH House of Parliament can adjourn its proceedings 
 for any period of hours, weeks and days, at its own will 
 or pleasure. This is done by a motion proposed in the 
 usual way, then put from the Chair or the Woolsack, as 
 the case may be, and agreed to or carried on a division. 
 But besides adjournments, there are two other functions 
 known as " prorogation," which brings the Session of 
 both Houses to a simultaneous end, and abolishes all 
 pending legislation ; and "dissolution,'" which terminates 
 the existence of Parliament. Neither House can exercise 
 either of these two functions. They are put into opera- 
 tion solely by the Sovereign. 
 
 Before the Revolution of 1688 the only way in which 
 a Parliament could be dissolved was by command of the 
 Sovereign, or by his death. The theory of the Consti- 
 tution was that as Parliament was a Grand Council which 
 the Sovereign called together to confer with him in 
 matters relating to the government of the realm, he 
 could retain it as long as he liked, or dismiss it when he 
 pleased ; and as this invitation to the estates of the 
 realm was supposed to lapse with the death of him who 
 issued it, it grew also into a usage that when a King- 
 died Parliament was at once dissolved. But in our 
 more democratic times these theories of the Constitution
 
 422 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 have come to be largely modified by written statute and 
 unwritten custom. The Sovereign, living or dead, does 
 not exercise so supreme an influence over the existence 
 of a Parliament ; for a Parliament can now only be dis- 
 solved in one of two ways, either by dying a natural death 
 at the end of its prescribed existence of seven years, or 
 by proclamation, issued at any time within the seven 
 years by the Sovereign, on the advice of the Ministers of 
 the day. 
 
 Down to the Revolution the only law controlling the 
 royal will in the making or unmaking of Parliaments 
 was that which provided that not more than three years 
 should elapse between the dissolution of one Parliament 
 and the summoning of another. The history of the 
 origin of this law is interesting. In 1629 the merchants 
 of our towns and cities refused to pay two oppressive 
 duties called " tonnage " and " poundage," which were 
 levied by King Charles I. for his own private purposes, 
 without the consent of Parliament. Sir John Elliott, 
 an independent and fearless member of the House of 
 Commons, framed a remonstrance to the King against 
 these duties ; and as the Clerk refused to read it, Sir 
 John read it to the House himself. Mr. Speaker 
 Finch (the subservient tool of Charles I. in the House 
 of Commons) then refused to put the question of 
 the adoption of the remonstrance and said he had a 
 command from the King to adjourn. He then rose and 
 left the Chair ; but he was pushed back into it again, 
 and held there by main force by two members, named 
 Holies and Valentine, until the remonstrance was carried 
 by acclamation. The King was in the House of Lords 
 at the time, and hearing what was passing in the 
 Commons, he sent down " Black Hod, 11 who, in obedience
 
 THE DISSOLUTION 423 
 
 to the royal commands, carried oft' the mace, without 
 which the House of Commons cannot be constituted, and 
 thus brought the historic sitting to a close. A few days 
 afterwards, on March 10, 1629, Parliament was dis- 
 solved, and was not summoned again until 1640, an 
 interval of eleven years. 
 
 The new Parliament was the famous " Long Parlia- 
 ment," which remained in existence for the longest 
 period in Parliamentary history from 1640 to 1660 
 which waged war against Charles I., and ultimately 
 consigned him to death in 1649; a portion of which, 
 known as the " Rump, 1 ' Cromwell turned out without 
 ceremony in 1653, because they were not sufficiently sub- 
 missive to his will, and which assembled together again, 
 forty-two members all told, seven years subsequently, 
 under the name of Convention, to bring back Charles II. 
 It was only then that the Parliament was dissolved 
 by the new King. One of the first things done by the 
 Long Parliament in 1641 was to pass an Act declaring 
 that Parliament should not be dissolved by the Sovereign 
 without its own consent, and that the Sovereign should 
 not allow more than three years to elapse after dissolu- 
 tion without calling together again the Grand Council 
 of the nation. Three years was a long period surely to 
 leave the people without their Parliament ; but it was 
 too brief for Charles II. Learning nothing from the 
 terrible lessons of the past ; true to the traditions of the 
 Stuarts, who considered themselves in misfortune and 
 prosperity alike to be above the law, and were sorely 
 impatient of all constitutional restraint, Charles II. 
 had this Act of 1641 repealed in 1664 by his own 
 Long Parliament the first elected after his succession, 
 which sat for seventeen years and not only summarily
 
 424 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 dismissed a Parliament in 1680, but did not summon 
 another again until 1684. Nowadays the proclama- 
 tion which dissolves one Parliament commands the 
 immediate election of another; and allowing, as Lord 
 Brougham's Act passed in 1852 prescribes, thirty-five 
 days for the election, fixes the date on which the new 
 Parliament shall assemble at Westminster. 
 
 Before the Revolution, then, there was no limit to the 
 duration of Parliament, save the arbitrary will of the 
 Sovereign. A Parliament was long or short according 
 as it obsequiously bowed to the demands of the Throne 
 however unreasonable, or sturdily opposed them. But 
 in 1694, in the reign of William and Mary, an Act 
 known as the Triennial Act, was passed, which provided 
 that no Parliament should last more than three years. 
 So the law remained until the beginning of the reign of 
 George I., when, in 1716, a Parliament, elected to sit for 
 three years under the Act of 1694, prolonged its own 
 mandate to a period of seven years by passing the Sep- 
 tennial Act. It has been repeatedly said that for a Par- 
 liament, without appeal to the people, to add four years 
 to the term for which it had been elected was an utter 
 violation of the spirit at least, if not the form, of the 
 Constitution. But such a contention implies the exist- 
 ence of a limit to the power and authority of Parliament. 
 No such bonds or fetters exist within the Constitution. 
 Parliament, as already said, is omnipotent. It has 
 absolute power to pass any law it pleases ; but its laws 
 are not immutable. Every one of its Acts is open 
 to revision, and a wet sponge can be wiped across any 
 law at any time by the vote of the transcendent and 
 absolute assembly which has brought all statute law into 
 existence.
 
 THE DISSOLUTION 425 
 
 The Septennial Act was passed in 1716, to avert a 
 "rave political danger. In 1714, when the Elector of 
 Hanover became George I. of England, in accordance 
 with the Act of Settlement, the Constitutional principles 
 which triumphed at the Revolution, and were bound up 
 indissolubly with the Protestant succession to the Throne, 
 were in a very critical plight. The exiled Stuarts were 
 plotting busily to recover the Crown. They had a large 
 following in every part of England; a larger still in 
 Scotland and Ireland ; some of the ablest and boldest 
 men in the country were in their service ; and hoping to 
 profit by the feelings of disloyalty and discontent which 
 were rapidly spreading on all sides, the Pretender (son of 
 James II.) landed in Scotland in 1715. The rebellion 
 was soon crushed ; but the Government feared, with 
 very good reason, that the result of the General Election, 
 which was due in 1717, would be the return of a Tory 
 Parliament pledged to the restoration of the Stuarts, 
 and the consequent destruction of all the popular 
 liberties that had been won in the long and weary and 
 bitter struggles of the seventeenth century. To avoid 
 these calamities the Septennial Act was passed. 
 
 The law then was that Parliament, if not sooner dis- 
 solved by royal prorogation, or the death of the Sove- 
 reign, should expire at the end of seven years. But the 
 reign of George III. witnessed a further change in the 
 law regulating the life of a Parliament. The custom by 
 which Parliament was dissolved on the death of the 
 Sovereign was abolished, and it was enacted that the 
 Parliament in existence at the demise of the King 
 should continue to exist for six months, if not sooner 
 dissolved by the new Sovereign. It was also provided 
 that in case the demise of the Monarch took place
 
 426 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 during a dissolution, and before the election of the new 
 Parliament was completed, the old was to be renewed for 
 a period of six months. These Acts, however, are not now 
 in operation. The Reform Act of 1868, repealing all 
 the earlier statutes on the subject, makes the duration 
 of Parliament independent of the demise of the Sove- 
 reign. The members of a Parliament in existence at 
 the demise must, however, take a fresh oath of allegiance 
 to the new King or Queen. 
 
 But though the law allows seven years as the full life 
 of a Parliament, custom has reduced its average duration 
 to five years. Not a single Parliament has died a natural 
 death, simply by the efflux of its statutory term of exist- 
 ence. Parliaments have been cut short by the fall of the 
 Ministry in office on an adverse vote in the House of 
 Commons ; Parliaments have lived close up to the time 
 when the operation of the Septennial Act would have- 
 put an end to them, and have then been dissolved on 
 the advice of the Ministers ; but no Parliament has been 
 allowed to run to its full course of seven years. No one, 
 therefore, knows what would happen in such a con- 
 tingency. It is probably the only situation for which 
 the Constitution does not provide. 
 
 The duration of Parliament, therefore, often varies. 
 Since the union with Ireland, there have been twenty-six 
 Parliaments. The shortest was that which assembled 
 on December 15, 1806, and was dissolved April 29, 1807, 
 the duration being only four months and fourteen days. 
 The longest was from April 23, 1820, to June 2, 1826, 
 a period of six years, one month, and ten days. In the 
 present reign the Parliaments have been fairly long, but 
 not one out of the thirteen has run its whole possible 
 course of seven years. The longest was from May 31,
 
 THE DISSOLUTION 427 
 
 1859, to July 6, 1865, being six years, one month, and 
 six days old when it was dissolved. The Liberal Parlia- 
 ment, elected in 1885, though it did not meet until 
 January 12, 1886, was the shortest. It came to an end 
 on the Home Rule question, and was dissolved June 26, 
 1886, after lasting only five months and fourteen days. 
 
 In strict legal theory the right of the Sovereign to 
 dissolve Parliament at his own personal pleasure that 
 is in complete independence of the wishes of the Ministers 
 is unquestionable. But it is certain that such action 
 on the part of the Sovereign would be considered nowa- 
 days as a breach of the spirit of the Constitution. The 
 last time this prerogative of the Sovereign was exercised 
 was in 1834, when the Melbourne Administration was 
 dismissed by the personal act of William IV., who 
 assumed that it was irreparably weakened by the call 
 of Lord Althorp, the Leader of the House of Commons, 
 to the House of Lords on the death of his father, Earl 
 Spencer. 
 
 A change in the composition of the electorate by the 
 passing of a Reform Act is held to necessitate an imme- 
 diate opportunity being given to the new electors to 
 exercise the franchise. Accordingly, Parliament was 
 dissolved on the new registers after the Reform Acts of 
 1832, 1868, and 1885 had become law. The efflux 
 of time, and the passing of a vote adverse to the 
 Ministry on some question of importance in the House 
 of Commons, are the only other causes that determine 
 the existence of a Parliament. The exercise of the 
 royal prerogative without the consent of the Ministers 
 may now, practically, be left out of consideration. But 
 the Ministry do not invariably appeal to the country 
 when defeated in the House of Commons on a vital
 
 42S THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 issue. The alternative of resigning is open to them. 
 By dissolving Parliament the Ministry ask the people to 
 act as judges in the controversy ; to decide the issue in 
 the polling booths. If the country replies by returning 
 a House of Commons favourable to the Ministry, they 
 remain in office ; if the result of the General Election is 
 a triumph for their opponents, the Ministry either 
 resign before meeting the new Parliament or wait until 
 the new Parliament dismisses them by a vote of want of 
 confidence. If, on the other hand, the Ministry decide 
 in the first contingency to resign rather than appeal to 
 the country a new Administration is appointed from the 
 party which has proved itself the stronger in the trial of 
 strength in the division lobbies. It may be asked what 
 rule decides the choice by the Government of one of the 
 two courses open to them when defeated in the House of 
 Commons resignation or dissolution ? There is no 
 rule or usage. The Ministry are guided solely by partv 
 interests. The alternative that seems the better for their 
 party or the more embarrassing for their opponents is 
 the one usually adopted in such circumstances. 
 
 Two functions are necessary before the death of a 
 Parliament can be certified. When the Ministry have 
 announced their intention of appealing to the constitu- 
 encies, the necessary business in both Houses is rapidly 
 wound up. Then Parliament is, in the first place, 
 prorogued or adjourned, and within a few days a royal 
 proclamation is published in the London Gazette, finally 
 dissolving it. This proclamation, which is issued by 
 " the Queen in Council," also summons a new Parliament. 
 The Privy Council, by and with whose advice the Queen 
 issues the proclamation for the prorogation or dissolu- 
 tion of Parliament, is the whole body of the Privy Coun-
 
 THE DISSOLUTION 429 
 
 cillors in theory, but is practically the Cabinet. The 
 Councils for prorogation and dissolution are attended in 
 person by the Sovereign, who is never present at ordinary 
 meetings of the Cabinet or the Privy Council, a practice 
 due originally to the fact that George II. absented him- 
 self from the deliberations of his Council because he was 
 unable to speak the English language. The proclama- 
 tion dissolving Parliament is so curious and interesting 
 that it is well worth quoting : 
 
 By the Queen. A Proclamation for dissolving the pre- 
 sent Parliament and declaring the calling of another. 
 VICTORIA R. 
 
 Whereas we have thought fit, by and with the advice of 
 our Privy Council, to dissolve this present Parliament, 
 which stands prorogued to , the day of next. 
 
 We do for that end publish this our royal Proclamation, 
 and do hereby dissolve the said Parliament accordingly ; 
 and the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and the knights, 
 citizens, and burgesses, and the commissioners for shires 
 and burghs of the House of Commons, are discharged from 
 their meeting and attendance on the said , the 
 
 day of next. And we being desirous and resolved 
 
 as soon as may be to meet our people and to have their 
 advice in Parliament, do hereby make known to all our 
 loving subjects our royal will and pleasure to call a new 
 Parliament : and do hereby further declare that with the 
 advice of our Privy Council we have given order that our 
 Chancellor of that part of the United Kingdom called Great 
 Britain and our Chancellor of Ireland do respectively, on 
 notice thereof, forthwith serve out writs in due form, and 
 according to law, for calling a new Parliament. 
 
 And we do hereby also by this our royal Proclamation 
 under our Great Seal of our United Kingdom, require 
 writs forthwith to be issued accordingly by our said
 
 430 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 Chancellors respectively for causing the Lords Spiritual and 
 Temporal and Commons who are to serve in the said Par- 
 liament to be duly returned to, and to give their attend- 
 ance in, our said Parliament on the day of next ; 
 which writs are to be returnable in due course of law. 
 
 Given at our Court at Windsor, this day of , in 
 
 the year of our Lord , and in the year of our 
 
 reign. 
 
 GOD SAVE THE QUEEN. 
 
 Hut as I have said, before this Proclamation is pub- 
 lished the ceremony of prorogation must take place. It 
 is similar in every respect to the function that marks 
 the end of every Session. The five Royal Commissioners 
 take their seats on the bench in front of the uncovered 
 Throne. " Black Rod " is forthwith directed to summon 
 the House of Commons, and within five minutes the 
 Speaker, attended by the Serjeant-at-Arms without the 
 mace, and accompanied by some members usually few 
 in number on the eve of a dissolution appears at the 
 Bar. The Lord Chancellor then announces that her 
 Majesty, not thinking fit to be present, had appointed a 
 Royal Commission to give assent to various Bills and 
 " to do all other things in her Majesty's name."" But 
 not a word is said about the impending dissolution. The 
 Royal Commission is then read at the table by the 
 Reading Clerk, and the royal assent is given to all Bills 
 that have passed through both Houses. 
 
 Formerly at the end of every Session it was the custom 
 for the Speaker to read at the Bar a written speech 
 addressed to the Sovereign recapitulating the labours of 
 the Commons during the Session, and the Lord Chan- 
 cellor followed with a " Queen's Speech " a speech, 
 purporting to have been written by her Majesty, but
 
 THE DISSOLUTION 431 
 
 reallv, as already explained, from the pen of the Prime 
 Minister expressing thanks for the supplies granted by 
 "the faithful Commons,"" and congratulations on the 
 valuable additions to the Statute Book which the labours 
 of the Session had produced. This speech was subse- 
 quent Iv read by the Speaker in the House of Commons. 
 But these two functions have fallen into desuetude in 
 recent years. The speech of the Speaker has been 
 entirely dropped, and there has rarely been a " Queen's 
 Speech"" at prorogation for the past four or five years. 
 
 The most historic dissolution of Parliament occurred 
 on the 20th of April 1653, when Cromwell practically 
 kicked the " Rump Parliament " out of the House of 
 Commons. The House was deliberating on a Bill which 
 proposed to give them a more secure tenure when Cromwell 
 resolved to make an end of them. The Lord Protector, 
 having ordered a company of musketeers to follow him, 
 entered the House in plain black clothes and grey 
 worsted stockings, and sitting down, he listened for a 
 while to their proceedings. Hearing at length the 
 question put, that the Bill do pass, he rose, put off' his 
 hat, and began to speak. In the course of his address, 
 he told them of their self seeking and delays of justice, 
 till at length Sir Peter Wentworth interrupted him with 
 a remonstrance against such language. Then, blazing 
 up, he said, " We have had enough of this. I will put 
 an end to your prating."" Stepping into the floor of the 
 House, and putting on his hat, he commenced a violent 
 harangue, which he occasionally emphasised by stamping 
 with his feet, and which came mainly to this, " It is not 
 fit you should sit here any longer. You have sat too 
 long for any good you have been doing. You shall now 
 give place to better men. Call them in,"" he exclaimed,
 
 4.32 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 and his officer, Harrison, and a file of soldiers entered 
 the House. Then, proceeding, he said, " You are no 
 Parliament. Some of you are drunkards, 11 bending a 
 stern eye on one member. " Some of you are - 11 (a 
 word expressive of a worse immorality), and he looked 
 at other's, " living in open contempt of God's command- 
 ments. Some of you are corrupt, unjust persons. How 
 can you be a Parliament for God's people ? Depart, I 
 say, and let us have done with you. Go ! " He lifted 
 the mace from the table, and gave it to a musketeer to 
 take away. He caused Harrison to give his hand to 
 Speaker Lenthall, and lead him down from the Chair. 
 The members, cowed by his violence, and the sight of 
 the armed men, moved gloomily out of the House. " It 
 is the Lord that has caused me to do this," he said. " I 
 have sought He would rather slay me than put me to 
 such work. 11 Sir Harry Vane ventured a remonstrance. 
 " Oh, Sir Harry Vane, 11 exclaimed the Lord-Protector, 
 " the Lord deliver me from Sir Harry Vane ! " When 
 all had gone out, he came out too, and locked the door. 
 From that time he was master of the three kingdoms 
 for about five and a half years. 
 
 Another famous dissolution was that which followed 
 on the determination of the Whig Ministry to take the 
 sense of the country on the first Reform Bill in 1830. 
 The second reading of the Bill was carried at three 
 o'clock on the morning of March 23, by a majority of 
 one, in one of the fullest Houses that ever was known, 
 303 being for the Bill and 302 against it. During 
 April the Bill was slowly and with difficulty making its 
 way through Committee, when the Government made 
 up its mind to dissolve. A Cabinet Council was held on 
 Friday, April 22, at half-past eleven o'clock.
 
 THE DISSOLUTION 433 
 
 Almost all agreed to go on [writes Brougham, the Lord 
 Chancellor, in his " Memoirs "], though one or two, appalled 
 by the many increasing difficulties, asked if it was too late 
 to reconsider the whole matter. Here I appealed to the 
 Duke of Richmond, and asked him if he had ever seen a 
 council of war held on the field just before going into 
 action. He said " By God, never ; neither I nor any one 
 else." Then said I, " Let us go to the King." 
 
 The Premier (Earl Grey) and the Lord Chancellor 
 went to the King, and, after a good deal of persuasion, 
 got him to consent to go down and prorogue Parliament 
 in person at two o'clock. "This coup d'etat was so 
 sudden," writes Greville, " that nobody was aware of it 
 until two or three hours of the time, and many not 
 at all." 
 
 The proceedings in both Houses when they met at 
 two o'clock were very violent. By far the best descrip- 
 tion of the scenes is that by Greville, who gathered the 
 incidents from some of the chief actors. 
 
 In the House of Commons [he writes] Sir R. Vyvyan 
 made a furious speech, attacking the Government on 
 every point, and excited as he was, it was very well done. 
 The Ministers made no reply, but Sir Francis Burdett and 
 Tennyson endeavoured to interrupt with calls to order, and 
 when the Speaker decided that Vyvyan was not out of 
 order, Tennyson disputed his ruling, which enraged the 
 Speaker, and soon after called up Peel, for whom he was 
 resolved to procure a hearing. The scene then resembled 
 that which took place on Lord North's resignation in 1782, 
 for Althorp (I think) moved that Burdett should be heard, 
 and the Speaker said that " Peel was in possession of the 
 House to speak on that motion." He made a very violent 
 speech, attacking the Government for their incompetence,
 
 434 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 folly, and recklessness, and treated them with the utmost 
 asperity and contempt. In the midst of his speech the 
 guns announced the arrival of the King ; and at each ex- 
 plosion the Government gave a loud cheer, and Peel was 
 still speaking in the midst of every sort of noise and con- 
 fusion when the Usher of the Black Rod knocked at the 
 door to summon the Commons to the House of Peers. 
 
 There [continues Greville] the proceedings were, if 
 possible, still more violent and outrageous. Those who 
 were present tell me that it resembled nothing but what 
 we read of the " Serment du Jeu de Paume," and the 
 whole scene was as much like the preparatory days of a 
 revolution as can well be imagined. Wharncliffe was to 
 have moved an Address to the Crown against dissolving 
 Parliament ; and this motion the Ministers were resolved 
 should not come on ; but he contrived to bring it on so 
 far as to get it put upon the Journals. The Duke of 
 Richmond endeavoured to prevent any speaking by raising 
 points of order, and moving that the Lords should take 
 their regular places (in separate ranks), which however is 
 impossible at a royal sitting, because the cross benches 
 are removed ; this put Lord Londonderry in such a fury 
 that he rose, roared, gesticulated, held up his whip, and 
 four or five lords held him down to prevent his flying on 
 somebody. Lord Lyndhurst was equally furious, and some 
 sharp words passed which were not distinctly heard. In 
 the midst of all the din, Lord Mansfield rose and obtained 
 a hearing. Wharncliffe said to him, " For God's sake, 
 Mansfield, take care what you are about, and don't dis- 
 grace us more in the state we are in." " Don't be afraid," 
 said he ; " I will say nothing that will alarm you." And 
 accordingly he pronounced a trimming philippic on the 
 Government, which, delivered as it was in an imposing 
 manner, attired in his robes, and with the greatest energy 
 and excitation, was prodigiously effective.
 
 THE DISSOLUTION 435 
 
 All this time Lord Chancellor Brougham was outside 
 the Chamber awaiting the arrival of the King, and the 
 \Voolsack was occupied by the Earl of Shaftesbury. 
 Hearing how matters were progressing in the House, he 
 rushed in, and speaking amid angry cries of dissension, 
 defended the action of the Government in advising the 
 King to dissolve Parliament. He states that he 
 purposely continued speaking until he heard the guns 
 outside announcing the arrival of the King. "Black 
 Rod "" stood at his elbow, crying : " My Lord Chancellor, 
 you must come ; the King is waiting for you ; come 
 along ; you must come ; " and he was dragged out of 
 the House by the impatient functionary. In the robing 
 room his Majesty asked the Lord Chancellor what all 
 the noise in the House meant ; and Brougham replied : 
 " It is the Lords debating, sir."" " Hansard " is not 
 strong in descriptive ; but this is how it describes the 
 manner in which the Lords debated after the Lord 
 Chancellor had left. " It is impossible to describe the 
 confusion, the noise, the impetuosity, that prevailed 
 from one end of the House to the other. The peeresses 
 sinned alarmed. Some of the peers were, as it appeared 
 in the confusion, almost scuffling, and a.s if shaking their 
 hands at each other in anger." 
 
 However, when the King entered the tumult ceased : 
 
 George Villiers said that in his life he never saw such 
 a scene [writes Greville] ; and as lie looked at the King 
 upon the Throne, with the Crown loose upon his head, 
 and the tall, grim figure of Lord Grey close beside him, 
 with the Sword of State in his hand, it was as if the 
 King had got his executioner by his side, and the whole 
 picture looked strikingly typical of his and our future 
 destinies.
 
 436 THE BOOK OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 The Commons were summoned to the Bar by " Black 
 Rod," the speech from the Throne proroguing Parlia- 
 ment " with a view to its immediate dissolution,"" was 
 read by the King, and all was over. 
 
 At the prorogation, before dissolution, of the last 
 Parliament, on September 5, 1895, the proceedings were 
 extremely brief and simple. After the royal assent had 
 been given to Bills, the Lord Chancellor announced that 
 in obedience to her Majesty's commands Parliament was 
 prorogued until Monday, November 18. Again not a 
 word was said about the dissolution. The Speaker and 
 the Commons then retired from the Bar. The Lords Com- 
 missioners shook hands with the Lord Chancellor, and 
 withdrew to their robing-rooms behind the Throne. The 
 Lord Chancellor gathered up his robes, walked down 
 the floor and disappeared. So far as the House of Lords 
 was concerned the proceedings were over. For the 
 ]>eers the General Election has no terrors. They need 
 have no apprehensions that they may lose their seats ; 
 that they may never return to the scarlet benches of the 
 Gilded Chamber. It is true that it is only in virtue of 
 fresh writs of summons from the Crown that they can 
 again take their seats. But under the law these fresh 
 writs of summons cannot be denied to them. 
 
 With the Commons, however, it is different. Few of 
 them have any certainty of being able to return again 
 to the Palace of Westminster as members of Parliament. 
 It is not unlikely, therefore, that thoughts tinged with 
 melancholy prevail in that little band of members, 
 which, faithful to the last, follows the Speaker for the 
 last time for that Parliament, from the House of Lords 
 to the House of Commons. The Speaker walks up the 
 floor of the Chamber, bowing to the empty Chair, and
 
 THE DISSOLUTION 437 
 
 followed by the Serjeant-at-Arms with the mace on his 
 shoulder. The mace, however, is not laid again on the 
 table ; nor, strangely enough, does the Speaker enter 
 the Chair, to tell the Commons that he has been 
 to the Lords, and that Parliament is prorogued. He 
 walks past the Chair, and lingering in the shadows 
 behind it, shakes hands, and wishes good luck in the 
 coming battle to the faithful few that surround him. 
 Then gathering up his long gown he disappears from the 
 Chamber. The Serjeant-at-Arms, with the mace, is 
 gone also. All is over. It has struck twelve oY-lock for 
 this Parliament. 
 
 " Who goes home ? " shouts the doorkeeper in the 
 lobby. " Who goes home ? " echo the policemen in all 
 the corridors. Who goes home, indeed ! Is it not un- 
 feeling is it not cruel to talk of home in the circum- 
 stances ? It is not home they go they to whom the 
 question is addressed but to the North, the South, the 
 Kast, and the West, to renew the wooing of the electors, 
 to tread again for three weeks that steep and thorny 
 wav which leads to a seat in the House of Commons.
 
 INDEX 
 
 ABBOTT, Mr. Speaker, 123 
 
 casting vote of, in charge against Lord Melville, 129 
 
 Grattan's Catholic Emancipation Bill opposed by, 128 
 Abercromby, Mr., election to Speakership, 123, 125 
 
 Aberdeen, Lord, suspected of revealing State secrets to the Times, 345, 347 
 Aberdeen University, Parliamentary representation, 38 
 Addington, Sir H., Speaker, 123 
 
 nomination objected to, 127 
 Adjournment of House, 230, 232, 421 
 Admiralty, offices and salaries, 173, 177 
 Airy, Sir G. B. , " Big Ben " constructed by, 8r 
 Althorp, Viscount, report of debate sent to William IV., 360 
 Appeals in House of Lords, 300 
 Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 302 
 Appropriation Act, 396 
 Archbishops of Canterbury and York 
 
 Lords of Parliament on consecration, 135 
 
 positions in House of Lords, 291 
 Arrests by ' ' Black Rod, " 274 
 
 by Serjeant-at-Arms, 207, 418 
 Ashley, Lord (see Shaftesbury) 
 
 Attorney-General for England, office, salary, and fees, 175 
 Audit Department, 394, 396 
 Austria, payment of members in, 75 
 
 BALFOUR, A. J. 
 
 Committee of Supply, resolution, 394 
 
 lobbyists' practical joke on, 335 
 
 reports to her Majesty of proceedings in House, 362 
 Ballot Act, elections prior to, 42 
 
 passing of, 45, 46, 297 
 
 Balloting for introduction of Private Members' Bills, 262 
 Bankruptcy, disqualification for Parliament, removed on discharge, 28 
 Bar of the House of Commons, 145, 208, 223 
 
 House of Lords, 289 
 
 Barry, Sir Charles, architect of Houses of Parliament, 91 
 Beaconsfield, Lord 
 
 accident going to Windsor, 160 
 
 congratulations on first Premiership, 76 
 
 election speech, Aylesbury, 44 
 
 elections, reaction in, speech on, 40 
 
 formation of administration, speech on difficulties of, 152 
 
 opening of Parliament, knocked down by crush during, 195 
 
 Parliamentary career, remarks on, 78 
 
 Primrose day. 22
 
 INDEX 439 
 
 Beacon sfield, Lord 
 
 Queen's speeches, written by, 187 
 
 report of Parliamentary proceedings sent to her Majesty, 353 
 
 reports (newspaper) of speeches, interest in, 321, 322 
 
 resolution in reference to Dr. Kenealy, 143 
 
 second Reform Bill, 35 
 
 table of House described by, 221 
 " Bedchamber Question," 154 
 Begging-letters received by members, 55 
 Belgium, payment of members in, 75 
 
 Bentinck, Lord G., objection to Prince Consort in Peers' gallery, 357 
 " Big Ben," 80 
 Bills 
 
 average number introduced by unofficial members every session, 69 
 
 passage through House, 69 
 
 Private Bills, 226, 249, 262, 398 
 Bishops 
 
 number in House of Lords, 135 
 
 position in House of Lords, 291 
 " Black Rod,'' 274 
 
 Lord Chancellor preceded by, on entrance into House of Lords, 287 
 
 opening of Parliament, 102, no, 194, 196 
 
 Peer, when created, introduction of, 138 
 
 prorogation of Parliament, 430 
 "Blocking" Bills, explanation of term, 263 
 Blue, popularity as party colour, 19 
 Blue-books, average yearly issue, 69 
 Bores in House, 238 
 
 Bovvyer, Sir G. , objections to wording of " Black Rod's " mes-age, 279 
 Bradlaugh, C. , imprisonment in Clock Tower, 213 
 Brand, Mr. Speaker, 123, 126 
 
 " Black Rod's " message to the Commons, ruling in reference to, 279 
 
 debate on Bill for Better Protection of Person and Property in Ireland, 
 
 terminated by, 236 
 Bribes, electioneering, 13 
 
 Private Bills, members soliciting bribes for promotion or opposition of, 
 
 417 
 
 Bright, John, leader of second Reform agitation, 35 
 
 Brougham, Lord 
 
 acting as Lord Chancellor prior to his peerage, 295 
 
 dissolution after second reading of first Reform Bill, 342, 433, 435 - 
 
 Budget, 385 
 
 Burke, Edmund, constitutional relations between members ; constituents' 
 
 views on, 61, 63 
 ministers' salaries, views on, 167 
 
 Burns, John, answer to offer of bribe, 59 
 
 Bye-elections, introduction of new member after, 142, 145 
 
 CABINET 
 
 formation of, 149 
 
 Parliament summoned for session by, 193 
 
 principles of Bills laid before, previous to introduction in House, 250 
 
 prorogation and dissolution of Parliament, councils for, 420 
 Cairns, Sir Hugh, speech on reform, reported by Disraeli to Queen, 302 
 Cambridge University, Parliamentary representation, 38
 
 440 INDEX 
 
 Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H., motion for reduction of salary : defeat of 
 
 Liberal Government, 372 
 
 Canute the Great, first palace at Westminster built by, 83 
 Canvassing at general elections, 4 
 Casting vote given by Speaker, instances, 129 
 Chairman of Committees 
 
 duties, 253 
 
 election, 387 
 
 post of Deputy-Speaker occupied by, 130 
 
 duties in relation to Private Bill legislation, 401, 417 
 Chairman of Ways and Means, 401, 417 
 
 Chamberlain, Joseph, maiden speech, old friend's advice on, 239 
 Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, office and salary, 174 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer, Budget prepared by, 385 
 
 office and salary, 168 
 
 Chaplin, Mr., Government saved from defeat by a long speech, 373 
 Charles I. 
 
 intrusions on sittings of Commons, 355, 422 
 
 warrant for execution of, 87, 90 
 Charles II. 
 
 House of Lords visited by, 354 
 
 Speaker chosen by House of Commons, objected to by King, in 
 
 Writs to places previously unrepresented, last Sovereign to issue, 33 
 Chatham, Earl of 
 
 attack on statements in speech from throne, 187 
 
 exclusive rights of Commons in dealing with taxation, views on, 380 
 Chief Secretary for Ireland, office and salary, 173, 174 
 Civil Contingencies Fund, 396 
 Civil List, 380, 382 
 
 pensions, 168 
 
 Civil Service Estimates, 391 
 
 Clergy, disqualified for membership of House of Commons, 27 
 Clerk of Parliaments (House of Lords), royal assent to Bills, ceremonies, 270 
 Clerk of the Crown 
 
 oath of allegiance, ceremonies, 134 
 
 return of election writs received by, 140, 146 
 
 royal assent to Bills, ceremonies, 270 
 Clerk of the House of Commons, duties of, 221 
 Clock Tower, 80, 83 
 
 room for imprisonment of members in, 212 
 Cloture, introduction of, 236 
 
 Cobbett, William, " The Parliamentary History " mainly compiled by, 325 
 Cobden, Richard 
 
 letters received by, 57 
 
 Parliamentary life, regret on leaving, 67 
 
 Private Bills Committees, remarks on tediousness of, 411 
 Colonial Secretary, office and salary, 171, 172 
 Committee rooms, 406 
 Committee stage of Bill, 252 
 Committees 
 
 members of Private Bill Committees, not paid, 74 
 
 Private Bills, 399, 403 
 
 Public petitions, 227 
 
 selection, 260, 403 
 
 Standing Orders, 400 
 
 supply, 387
 
 INDEX 441 
 
 Committees 
 
 Ways and Means, 386 
 Compton, Sir Spencer 
 
 answer to a member's appeal for a hearing, 235 
 
 prolonged occupancy of Speaker's chair, 124 
 Comptroller and Auditor-General, duties of, 394 
 Comptroller of the Household, 177, 202 
 Conservative colours, 19 
 Consolidated Fund, 383, 394 
 
 " Congressional Record," United States, system of publication, 328 
 Corrupt Practices Act (1883), 22, 47, 50, 53 
 Corrupt practices at elections, bribery, 13 
 
 constituencies disfranchised for, 37 
 
 Select Committee on, 45 
 
 Counsel's fees at committees on Private Bills, 407 
 County members, property qualifications, ancient, 29 
 Courtney, Leonard, objection to report to Sovereign of proceedings in 
 
 House, 361 
 
 Cowper, William, Grenville's canvassing visit, description, 6 
 Crimean War, negotiations previous to, communicated to Times, 347 
 Cromwell, Oliver 
 
 death warrant of Charles I. signed by, 87 
 
 dissolution of " Rump " Parliament, 431 
 Cross benches, House of Lords, 289 
 Curran, T., speech to House after being sworn, 144 
 Customs, source and amount, 382 
 
 BEARING, Sir E., committed to Tower for publication of speeches, 311 
 Debates, appearance of House during big debate, 241 
 
 House of Lords, 292 
 
 manner of conducting, 231 
 Denis<5n, Mr. Speaker, 123, 126, 129 
 Denmark, payment of members in, 75 
 Deputy Serjeant-at-Arms, salary of, 205 
 Deputy Speaker, office held by Chairman of Committee, 387 
 
 provision for, 130 
 Derby, Lord 
 
 administration formed by, reception at Windsor Castle, 160 
 
 Queen's speeches written by, 187 
 
 revelation of State secrets to Times, speech on, 346 
 
 second Reform Bill described by, as " leap in the dark," 36 
 Despatch boxes, on table of House of Commons, 221 
 Devonshire, Duchess of, canvassing for Fox at Westminster election, 8 
 " Dinner-hour," dulness of House during, 233 
 Directorships, M.P.s sought for, 76 
 
 Disqualifications for membership of House of Commons, 27 
 Disraeli (see Beaconsfield) 
 Dissolution of Parliament, 421 
 Division lobbies, 244 
 Divisions 
 
 House of Commons, 242 
 
 House of Lords, 299 
 
 Downing Street (No. 10) Cabinet meetings formerly held at, 162 
 Drafting a Bill, 250 
 Dublin University, Parliamentary representation, 38
 
 44-2 INDEX 
 
 Duchy of Cornwall, revenue of, 383 
 Duchy of Lancaster, revenue of, 383 
 
 EDINBURGH University, Parliamentary representation, 38 
 Eldon, Lord, story of George III. and Lord Thurlow, 269 
 Elections 
 
 expenditure, downward tendency of, 53 
 
 manner of conducting, 24 
 
 petitions against, 49 
 
 preparations for, i 
 Electors, numbers, 3^, 36, 37 
 
 registration of, 38 
 
 Ellenborough, Lord, proceedings of Cabinet recorded in diary, 164 
 Elliott, Sir John, 422 
 Exchequer department, 394 
 Exchequer tallies, 89 
 Excise, source and amount, 382 
 Expulsion of member, 216 
 
 FELONS, Irish political, elections declared void by House of Commons, 28 
 
 Financial Secretary to the Treasury, office and salary, 176 
 
 Financial Secretary to the War Office, office and salary, 176 
 
 Fire, old Houses of Parliament destroyed by, 88 
 
 First Commissioner of Works, office and salary, 175 
 
 First Lord of the Admiralty 
 
 Navy Estimates prepared by, 384 
 
 office and salary, 173 
 
 retiring pension, 177 
 
 First Lord of the Treasury, office and salary, 167 
 Foreign Office, printing office in, 338 
 
 secret service supply, 393 
 
 Secretary's room, Cabinet meetings held in, 163 
 
 State documents stolen from, 338 
 Foreign Secretary, office and salary, 171 
 Foreigners' (not naturalised) disqualifications, 27, 37 
 Forster, W. E. , Ballot Bill introduced by, 46 
 
 Fowler, Sir H. H., Parish Councils Bill conducted through House by, 256 
 Fox, C. J. 
 
 party colours, 20 
 
 prejudices of English people gauged by, 179 
 
 Westminster election (1784), 8 
 France, payment of members, 75 
 Franchise, Reform Bills, 34 
 
 Representation of the People Act, 36 
 
 GANGWAY, House of Commons, 223 
 
 Garter King of Arms, 134, 138 
 
 General Elections (see Elections) 
 
 Gentlemen-at-Arms, Captain of Corps of, salary, 177 
 
 George I., attendance at debates in House of Lords discontinued by, 355 
 
 George III. 
 
 bribery at elections practised by, 13 
 
 newspaper reports of the Commons, objection to, 359 
 
 royal assent to Bills, 269
 
 INDEX 443 
 
 George III. 
 
 Sir Fletcher Norton deposed from Speaker's chair by, 123 
 
 speeches from Throne, 185, 186, 187 
 Germany, payment of members, 75 
 Gladstone, W. E. 
 
 attitude in debate, 242 
 
 Ballot Act, first opposed, afterwards supported by, 45, 46 
 
 " Black Rod's " entry interrupting speech of, 281 
 
 Cabinets, method of formation, 151 
 
 canvassing at Newark election, 4 
 
 Cloture Resolution, 236 
 
 despatch-boxes on table of House of Commons, habit of thumping, 221 
 
 Downing Street, Cabinet meetings held at, 163 
 
 Palmerston's manner towards in Cabinet Council, 165 
 
 Queen's Speeches written by, 192 
 
 Report to Sovereign of proceedings in House, 361, 363 
 
 Representation of the People Act, 36 
 Glasgow University, Parliamentary representation, 38 
 Gordon, Lord George, 20 
 
 Goschen, Mr., on "Tyranny of Constituencies," 65 
 Goulburn, H., contest for Speaker's chair, 125 
 Granville, George, 360 
 Grattan, Henry, 128 
 Greece, payment of senators, 75 
 
 Grenville, W., canvassing visit, Cowper's description, 6 
 Greville, Charles 
 
 Aberdeen, Lord, revelation of State secrets to Times, 347 
 
 dissolution after second reading of Reform Bill, account of, 433 
 
 as a political gossip, 164 
 
 on reporters' gallery in temporary House of Commons, 310 
 Grote, Mr., vote by ballot advocated by, 45 
 Gully, Mr. Speaker 
 
 candidature for Speaker's chair, 120 
 
 seat at Carlisle contested, 120 
 
 speech on re-election as Speaker, 118 
 
 HALL, Sir Benjamin, " Big Ben " named after, 81 
 Hansard s Debates, 3215 
 Hartington, Lord 
 
 chairman of Select Committee for Inquiry into Corrupt Practices, 45 
 
 Leader of the Liberal party, 150 
 
 Hatherley, Lord, Bill for Creation of Imperial Court of Appeal, unsuc- 
 cessful, 302 
 
 Hatsell, John, warning to William Pitt as to nomination of Speaker, 127 
 Henry VIII., Westminster Palace deserted for York House, 84 
 Herries, Charles, 339 
 
 Home Rule Bill, 1893, printing of, care taken to ensure secrecy, 340 
 Home Secretary, office, State documents stolen from, 338 
 
 salary, 171, 172 
 
 Home Tooke, Rev. T., last clergyman member of House of Commons, 27 
 Houghton, Lord, opinions confused by Parliamentary debates, 70 
 House of Commons, ancient places of assembly, 85 
 
 "best club in London," 72 
 
 Chamber, description of, 219 
 
 procedure in, 217, 226
 
 4-44 INDEX 
 
 House of Commons 
 
 Sovereign's presence in, unconstitutional, 354 
 
 Supply, sole control of, 379 
 House of Lords 
 
 Chamber of, 163, 288 
 
 as a Court of Appeal, 300 
 
 disqualification of peers for membership of House of Commons, 26 
 
 introduction of newly-created peer, 138 
 
 oath of allegiance, 133 
 
 old Chamber, 86 
 
 passage of Bill through, 266 
 
 procedure in, 284, 287, 295 
 
 Sovereign's appearance in, 354 
 Hume, Joseph, 88, 194 
 Hungerford, Sir W., first Speaker of House of Commons, 85, 132 
 
 IMPERIAL Supreme Court of Appeal, 302 
 
 India, Secretary for, office and salary, 171, 172 
 
 Inglis, Sir R. H., denial of representative principle in Constitution of 
 
 England, 32 
 
 Inland Revenue, source and amount, 382 
 Ireland 
 
 Attorney-General, office and salary, 173 
 
 Chief Secretary, office and salary, 173, 174 
 
 franchise reforms, 36 
 
 Lord Chancellor, office, salary, and pension, 173, 177 
 
 Lord Lieutenant, office and salary, 173 
 
 party colours, 20 
 
 rotten boroughs, compensation of proprietors, 13 
 
 Solicitor-General, offices and salary, 173 
 Irish members 
 
 balloting, novel system introduced by, 263 
 
 brawl during Committee on Home Rule Bill of 1893, 364 
 
 cloture first employed against, 237 
 
 number in House, 33, 36 
 
 obstruction, 236 
 
 Parnell's deposition, 406 
 
 position below gangway, 223 
 Irish peers, eligible as representatives of British constituencies, 27 
 
 mode of electing twenty-eight representatives in House of Lords, 136 
 Irish police, contempt for members of Parliament, 68 
 Irish political felons, elections declared void by House, 28 
 Italy, senators allowed travelling expenses, 75 
 
 JEWISH members, oath of allegiance, manner of taking, 142 
 
 Johnson, Dr. Samuel, reports of Parliamentary debates written by, 312 
 
 KEMBLE, Mrs., on opening of First Parliament by Queen Victoria, 189 
 Kenealy, Dr., 143 
 
 LABOUCHERE, Mr., House of Commons, comforts and pleasures of, 73 
 Ladies' gallery, 218, 224
 
 INDEX 445 
 
 Law Courts established at Westminster by Edward I., 84 
 
 Law Lords, House of Lords as Court of Appeal, 300, 302 
 
 Letters Patent, 105, 270 
 
 Liberal party colours, 19 
 
 Life peers, revival of dignity, 301 
 
 Littleton, Sir Thomas, nomination as Speaker objected to, 126 
 
 Lobby, House of Commons, 331 
 
 " Lobbyists," 330, 333, 348 
 
 London Gazette, 193, 428 
 
 London University, Parliamentary representation, 38 
 
 " Long Parliament," 423 
 
 Lord Advocate of Scotland, office and salary, 175 
 
 Lord Chamberlain, salary, 177 
 
 Lord Chancellor 
 
 duties of, contrasted with those of Speaker, 295, 298 
 
 oath of allegiance, ceremony on taking, 133 
 
 at opening of Parliament, 104, 197, 198 
 
 at prorogation, 430 
 
 Queen's speech read by, 184, 192, 198, 199 
 
 retiring pension, 177 
 Lord Privy Seal, 170 
 
 Lord President of the Council, office and salary, 170 
 Lord Steward of the Household, 177, 202 
 Lords-in-waiting, salary, 177 
 
 Lords of Appeal in Ordinary, office and salary, 303 
 Lyndhurst, Lord, averse to holding Cabinet meetings after dinner, 164 
 Lytton, Sir Edward, speech on Reform, Disraeli's report to her Majesty, 
 353 
 
 MACAULAY, Lord 
 
 on canvassing, 4 
 
 on constitutional relations between members and constituents, 62 
 
 description of formation of a ministry, 155, 156 
 
 Parliamentary career, 51, 66 
 
 Parliamentary debates, secrecy of, 311 
 
 on reporters' gallery, 320 
 Mace 
 
 House of Commons, 222 
 
 House of Lords, 287, 305 
 Maiden speeches, 238 
 
 Malmesbury, Lord, on revelation of State secrets to Times, 347 
 Martin, " Dick," 211 
 
 Martin, Henry, death warrant of Charles I. signed by, 87 
 Master of the Buckhounds, annual gift to Speaker, 131 
 
 salary, 177 
 
 Master of the Horse, salary, 177 
 May, Sir Erskine 
 
 objection to reporting proceedings in House to the Sovereign, 361 
 
 remarks on place-hunting, 166 
 Melbourne, Lord 
 
 " Bedchamber Question," 154 
 
 Cabinet Councils, proceedings at, 165 
 
 dismissal of Ministry by William IV.; Brougham's revelation to Times, 
 
 34 2 
 Queen's speeches written by, 187, 189
 
 446 INDEX 
 
 Melville, 'Lord, 129 
 Members 
 
 acceptance of office involves resignation and re-election, 178 
 
 bribes offered to, 59 
 
 constitutional relations with constituents, 60 
 
 correspondence, 55 
 
 disqualifications, 26, 27 
 
 election expenses, 29, 53 
 
 new members, 94, 96 
 
 newspaper notoriety, 321 
 
 payment of, England an exception to all other countries. 75 
 
 property qualifications, ancient, 29 
 
 silent members, 70 
 
 Message from the throne, ceremony of presentation, 202 
 Ministers 
 
 Bill, duties of Minister in charge of, 250 
 
 correspondence, 180 
 
 estimates for supply, prepared by, 384 
 
 offices and salaries, 166 
 
 private rooms in House, 93 
 
 questions addressed to, method of dealing with, 228 
 Ministry, defeated, courses open to, 427 
 
 formation of a, 148 
 Mistress of the Robes, salary, 177 
 Mitford, Sir John, Speaker, 123 
 Mozley, Rev. T., " Reminiscences," 30 
 
 " NAMING " a member, 215 
 
 National Conservative Union, organisation, i, 2, 3, 39 
 
 National Debt 
 
 interest paid out of Consolidated Fund, 383, 384 
 
 schemes for paying off sent to Chancellors of the Exchequer, 181 
 
 National Liberal Federation, organisation, i, 2, 3, 39 
 
 Nelson, annuities to heirs of, paid out of Consolidated Fund, 383 
 
 Newgate, " strangers" sentenced by House of Commons, lodged in, 212 
 
 Nomination papers, 26 
 
 Norfolk, Sir James, dismissal from office of Serjeant-at Arms, 206 
 
 North, Lord, bribery at elections ; letter to George III., 14 
 dismissal from office, 158 
 
 Northcote, Sir Stafford, reception of new ministers by Queen, described by, 
 160 
 
 Norton, Hon. Mrs., 345 
 
 Norton, Sir Fletcher, removal from Speaker's Chair, 123 
 
 " Nursing" a constituency, 54 
 
 CATH of allegiance, 139 
 
 ceremonies on taking, 133 
 
 member voting before taking oath, liable to loss of seat, 101 
 O'Brien, Smith, refusing to serve on Select Committee, 404 
 O'Brien, William, on Parliamentary life, 68 
 Office, privileges of, 75 
 Official Secrets Act, 339 
 Old Sarum, rotten borough, 30, 33 
 Onslow, Mr. Speaker, prolonged occupancy of Chair, 124
 
 INDEX 447 
 
 Opening of Parliament, ceremonies, 96, 193 
 
 Queen Victoria opening in person, 188, 191 
 
 William IV., opening for last time, 190 
 Oxford University, Parliamentary representation, 38 
 
 " PAIRING," 371 
 
 Palace of Westminster, 79 
 
 searching vaults before opening of Parliament, 97 
 Palmerston, Lord 
 
 Cabinet Councils ; manner of receiving Mr. Gladstone's proposals, 165 
 
 Memoirs : political correspondence in, 164 
 
 Ministry (1855), 155 
 
 Newtown seat, conditions of nomination, 10 
 
 Queen's speeches written by, 187 
 
 reports of Parliamentary proceedings sent to her Majesty, 352 
 
 Tory Ministers, boroughs bought and sold by, note on, 12 
 Parke, Sir John, created Baron Wensleydale, 301 
 Parliament 
 
 division into two Houses, 85 
 
 High Court of Justice, rights as, 207 
 Parliamentary agents, qualifications and duties, 400, 401 
 Parliamentary bar, counsel's fees, 407 
 " Parliamentary Debates," name substituted for "Hansard's Debates," 327 
 
 proceedings in Committees not recorded by, 261 
 Parliamentary life, pleasures and tribulations of, 51 
 Parnell, C. S. 
 
 Committee Room No. is, 406 
 
 " Ivy Day," 22 
 
 obstruction introduced as a policy by, 236 
 Party colours, 19 
 Party cries, 17 
 
 Party leaders, not nominated or formally elected, 150 
 Party organisations, preparing for a General Election, i 
 "Patronage Secretary to the Treasury," office held by chief Government 
 
 Whip, 370 
 
 Pay master- General, office of, 394 
 
 Payment of members, England the only country not practising, 74 
 Peel, Mr Speaker, 119, 123, 126 
 
 cloture first employed by, 237 
 
 mace used by Legislative Council of Jamaica, correspondence about, 222 
 Peel, Sir Robert 
 
 " Bedchamber Question," 154 
 
 Ministries formed by, Lord Ashley on, 153, 154 
 
 registration of electors, views on, 39 
 
 repeal of Corn Laws, policy prematurely revealed to Times, 344 
 
 speech on re-appointment of Mr. Shaw-Lefevre to Speakership, 126 
 Peers, disqualified from voting at Parliamentary elections, 37 
 
 Irish (see Irish Peers) 
 
 newly-created, ceremony on taking seat, 138 
 
 number, 290 
 
 oath of allegiance, ceremony on taking, 133 
 
 Scotch (see Scotch Peers) 
 Pensions 
 
 Civil List, 168 
 
 Ministers' pensions, 177
 
 448 INDEX 
 
 Perceval, Spencer, motion for general fast ; Viscount Althorp's report to 
 
 William IV., 361 
 Petitions 
 
 appeal to House of Lords, 304 
 
 election, 49 
 
 presentation in House of Commons, 226 
 Plunket, Lord, story of, 158 
 Pocket boroughs, 10, 30, 31 
 Political Offices Pensions Act, 178 
 Poll, introduction of, 42, 43 
 Polling booths, 41 
 Polling, personation agents, 41 
 Portugal, payment of members in, 75 
 Postmaster-General, office and salary, 175 
 " Potwallopers," franchise removed by Reform Act (1832), 34 
 Prayers 
 
 House of Commons, 218 
 
 House of Lords, 306 
 Premier, formation of Ministry, 150, 178 
 
 no salary attached to office, 167 
 
 resignation, 163 
 
 royal household, officers nominated by, 177 
 President of the Board of Agriculture, office and salary, 175 
 President of the Board of Trade, office and salary, 174 
 President of the Local Government Board, office and salary, 174 
 Presiding officers at elections, duties of, 41, 49 
 Press gallery (see Reporters' gallery) 
 "Primrose day," 22 
 Prince Consort 
 
 death, announcement to Houses of Parliament, 192 
 
 marriage, announcement, 191 
 
 repeal of Corn Laws, 357 
 
 vacant chair on left of throne, 197 
 Prince of Wales 
 
 birth, announcement to Houses of Parliament, 191 
 
 opening of Parliament, position during ceremony, 197 
 
 revenue of Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster, held by, 383 
 
 seat on cross-benches in House of Lords, 289 
 Printing of Acts of Parliament, 272 
 Private Bill legislation, 398 
 
 definition of " Private '" Bills, 249 
 
 introduction of, 226 
 
 passage through House, 262 
 " Private Members," 261 
 Privy Council 
 
 and Cabinet, development of, 149 
 
 prorogation and dissolution of Parliament, 429 
 Property qualifications for members, abolition of, 29 
 Prorogation of Parliament, 94, 421, 430 
 Public Accounts Committee, 396 
 Pugin, A. W., assistant architect of Palace of Westminster, 92 
 
 QUEEN Adelaide, Brougham's disclosure of Cabinet secrets to, 343 
 Queen Anne, present at debate in House of Lords, last occasion, 355
 
 INDEX 449 
 
 Queen Anne, refusal of assent to Bill, last instance, 271 
 Queen Victoria 
 
 address on speech from throne, presented to, 201 
 
 " Bedchamber Question," 154 
 
 opening of Parliament by, 188, 191, 196 
 
 Privy Councillors received by, on formation of new Ministry, 159 
 
 Privy Purse, 382 
 
 reports of Parliamentary proceedings sent to, by leader of House, 
 
 351 
 
 " Queen s reporter, ' 350 
 Queen's speech, 184, 431 
 *' Question time," 227 
 
 REDISTRIBUTION Acts, 36, 37 
 
 beneficial results, 50, 53 
 
 Reform Bill (1830), dissolution after second reading, 432 
 Reform Act (1832) 
 
 pocket boroughs abolished by, 13, 31, 33 
 
 polling time limited to two days by, 42 
 
 provides for registration of electors, 38 
 
 Russell, Lord John, on Bill, 31, 35 
 Reform Act (1867), 35 
 
 duration of Parliament, independent of decision of Sovereign, 426 
 
 Ministers, change of, re-election unnecessary, 179 
 
 universities enfranchised by, 38 
 Reform Act (1884), 37 
 Registration of Electors, 38 
 Repeal of Corn Laws 
 
 premature revelation of Peel's policy to Times, 344 
 
 Prince Consort's presence in Peers' gallery, objected to, 357 
 Reporters 
 
 House of Commons, 310 
 
 House of Lords, 224, 289, 290, 322 
 
 " Return Book," names of members and constituencies inscribed in, 140 
 Returning officers' charges, 29 
 
 duties, 25, 49 
 Revenue departments, 381 
 Revision courts, 39 
 
 Ridley, Sir M. W. , nomination for Speaker's Chair, 120 
 Rolls of Parliament, 134 
 
 Romilly, Sir Samuel, purchase of seat for Horsham, n 
 Rosebery, Lord 
 
 cures for insomnia sent to, 180 
 
 offices held by, 169 
 
 on political life, 183 
 
 Seal Fisheries Bill : anecdote, 158 
 Rotten boroughs 
 
 abolition of, by Reform Act (1832), 33 
 
 Irish, compensation to proprietors on passing of Act of Union, 13 
 Royal assent to Bills, ceremony of, 270 
 Royal family, Consolidated Fund Service, 382, 383 
 Royal household, offices in 177 
 " Rump " Parliament, 423, 431 
 Rushworth, John, 356 
 Russell, Lord (of Killowen), voting before taking oath, 137 
 
 *F
 
 450 INDEX 
 
 Russell, Lord John 
 
 Ballot Act, first opposed, afterwards supported by, 45 
 forming a Ministry, 152 
 Private Bill legislation, 419 
 Queen's speeches written by, 187 
 Reform Bill (1832) speeches, 31, 35 
 
 ST. ANDREWS University, Parliamentary representation, 38 
 Salisbury, Lord 
 
 Cabinet, number of members increased by, 162 
 
 dynamitards, letter to, 180 
 
 offices held by, 167 
 
 Scotch members, number in House, 33, 36 
 Scotch peers disqualified for seat in House of Commons, 27 
 
 representative peers, election of, 134, 136 
 Scotland, Lord Advocate, office and salary, 175 
 
 Secretary for, office and salary, 175 
 
 Solicitor-General, office and salary, 175 
 Seal, the Great, 287 
 Secret Service Supply, 393 
 Select Committees 
 
 payment of members, erroneous idea, 74 
 
 Private Bills, 403 
 Septennial Act, 424, 425 
 Serjeant-at-Arms, office of, 204 
 
 divisions, duties at, 243 
 
 opening of Parliament, 194, 195 
 
 prorogation of Parliament, 437 
 
 reporters' tickets issued by, 315 
 Seymour, Sir Edward, in 
 Shaftesbury, Lord 
 
 Ballot Bill opposed by, 46 
 
 dulness of House of Lords, remarks on, 293, 294 
 
 offers of office, 153 
 
 Shaw-Lefevre, Mr. Speaker, 123, 125 
 Sheridan, Brinsley, 16 
 "Silent members," 70 
 
 Smith, Sydney, on members of Parliament, 179, 195 
 Smith, W. H., dynamitards' letter to, 180 
 Solicitor-General (England), office, salary, and fees, 175 
 Spain, senators allowed travelling expenses, 75 
 Speaker, 115 
 
 address on Queen's Speech formerly presented by, 201 
 
 arrests under warrant of, 207 
 
 chair vacant during Committee of Supply, 253, 391 
 
 clSture, responsibility of moving transferred from Speaker, 237 
 
 constant attendance in House, 234 
 
 divisions, duties at, 242 
 
 election of, 101, 105, 115 
 
 entry into House, 217 
 
 introduction of Bill, duties on, 251 
 
 Lord Chancellor's office contrasted with that of Speaker, 295, 25 
 
 message from the Throne received by, 202 
 
 "naming" a member, 214 
 
 oath of allegiance, 139
 
 INDEX t.'.I 
 
 Speaker 
 
 opening of Parliament, 193, 196, 198, 199 
 
 prorogation of Parliament, farewell to members, 437 
 
 prorogation speech, discontinued, 430 
 
 reprimand of the House spoken by , 208 
 
 salary paid out of Consolidated Fund, 384 
 Speaker's chair, respect paid to, 118 
 Standing Orders 
 
 Private Bills, 399, 400 
 
 suppression of disturbance in House of Lords by reading of, 297 
 
 suspension of, in order to secure rapid legislation, 267 
 Stanley, Mr. E., 341 
 State secrets, betrayal of, 337 
 Stirling, John, "The Election," burlesque epic, 16 
 Supply, voting : procedure, 379 
 Supply services, charges on, 384 
 Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 302 
 Suspension of a member, 215 
 Sutton, Mr. Speaker, 123 
 
 contest for chair, 124 
 
 last Conservative Speaker, 121 
 
 superseded by Mr. Abercromby, 123 
 Switzerland, payment of members, 75 
 
 TALLIES, burning, fire in Westminster Palace caused by, 89 
 
 Taxation, 380 
 
 Tellers, duties during division , 245 
 
 Test Roll, signed by members on taking oath, 139 
 
 Tests Abolition Bill, casting vote given by Mr. Speaker Denison, 130 
 
 Thurlow (Lord Chancellor), 269 
 
 Times, State secrets published by, 341 
 
 Tories, party colours, 19 
 
 Treasurer of the Household, salary, 177 
 
 Treasury 
 
 offices and salaries, 168, 176 
 
 Supply, methods of dealing with, 385, 394 
 " Treasury Chest Fund," 396 
 
 Trevelyan, Sir G. , Parliamentary career, tribulations of, described by, 51 
 Trevor, Sir John, only Speaker ever expelled from House, 127 
 Triennial Act, 424 
 
 UNDER SECRETARIES, offices and salaries, 172, 176 
 United States, payment of representatives, 75 
 Universities, Parliamentary representation, 38 
 " Unparliamentary " expressions, 214 
 
 " VETO " power of the Crown, complete lapse of, 269 
 Vice-Chamberlain, salary, 177 
 Vice- President of the Council, office, 170, 175 
 Victoria, payment of members in, 75 
 
 WALES, representation in House of Commons, 36 
 
 Walpole, Sir Robert, publication of Parliamentary debates, views on, 312
 
 CSB LIBRARY 
 
 INDEX 
 
 War, Secretary of State for, 171, 384 
 
 Warren Hastings, compelled to kneel at Bar of House of Lords, 210 
 
 Wellington, Duke of 
 
 annuities to heirs paid out of Consolidated Fund, 383 
 
 disclosure of newly-formed Ministry, letter to Herries on, 339 
 Wensleydale, Baron, title conferred on Sir John Parke, 301 
 Westminster Abbey, 85 
 Westminster Hall, 90 
 Whigs, party colours, 19 
 Whips, 366 
 
 debates, order of speaking arranged by, 231 
 
 private rooms in House, 93 
 
 tyranny of, 71 
 
 Whitehall, name given to York House by Henry VIII., 84 
 Wilberforce, William 
 
 Hull election, sum spent on, 14* 
 
 Parliamentary life, fascination of, 67 
 
 Yorkshire election expenses, 53 
 Wilkes, John, contest with House of Commons, 359 
 William III., colours of, 21 
 William IV. 
 
 dissolution of Parliament after Reform Bill, 432 
 
 opening of Parliament for last time, 190 
 "Wobblers," 40 
 Woolsack, 287, 295 
 Writs for new Parliament. 24. 
 
 Lords Spiritual and Lords Temporal, text of writs to, 134 
 
 YKLYERTON, Mr. Serjeant, 107 
 
 Yeoman Usher of the Black Rod, 276, 306 
 
 Yeoman of the Guard, Captain of, office and salary, 177 
 
 In the text this incident is erroneously ascribed to Samuel Wilberforce.
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FAOLH 
 
 A 000 609 340