opening and forty days after the closing of the same, except the arrest be for the commission of an indictable offence or for contempt of court. Members elected subsequent to arrest and while in confinement have the privilege of liberation from the same, except the arrest and confinement be for the above-mentioned causes. The privilege extends also to exemption from witness service and jury service during the same period. The members of the House of Commons have perfect freedom of speech and debate in the House. They cannot be legally dealt with for anything said in the House by any court or body outside of the House. If, however, they cause their words or speeches to be published, they are subject to prosecution for libel, like any private persons.1 The members of the House of Lords are, if peers, exempt from arrest, at all times,2" except in case of treason, felony or refusal to give security for the peace." 3 This is by virtue, however, of the quality of peerage. As Lords of Parliament they have only the same exemption as the members of the House of Commons. The privilege extends, however, to the households of the Lords during the session and for twenty days before the beginning and twenty days after the close of the same.5 The members of the House of Lords have perfect freedom of speech and debate in the house; and I do not think that the decision in Stockdale v. Hansard (making the members of the House of Commons liable to prosecution for libel in case their words are defamatory of private character and in case they cause the publication of these words) is held to apply to the 1 Anson, Law and Custom of the Constitution, pp. 139 ff., 146; May, Parlia mentary Practice, pp. 112, 122, 142, 143. 2 Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. xviii, p. 311, Art. Parliament. members of the House of Lords. Honor and gentlemanly breeding are, in their case, relied upon to protect private individuals against their abuse of the privilege. Each member of the House of Lords has the privilege of having his dissent entered in the form of a protest upon the journal of the House.1 The Peers have, finally, the privilege of access, individually, to the person of the wearer of the crown. This is rather a privilege of the peerage than of lordship in Parliament. It is rather as councillors than as legislators that they may approach the throne.2 6. The Summons, Opening, Adjournment, Prorogation and Dissolution of the Parliament. The Parliament is summoned, opened and prorogued by the Crown exclusively. These acts, therefore, would not be referred to, at this point, except for the fact that in performing them the Crown proceeds by the advice of the Prime Minister, who is but the head of the cabinet and, as such, the representative of the party in majority in the House of ComIt is then really the House of Commons, through its leaders, which has assumed the power to move the Crown to these acts. mons. Statute requires the meeting of Parliament at least once in three years.3 Adjournment, i.e. cessation of the business of either house for a short period of time (as distinguished from prorogation, i.e. the termination of a session), may be undertaken by either house independently of the other or of the Crown. It is held that the Crown cannot compel either house to adjourn nor terminate an adjournment before the time fixed by the house itself.4 The dissolution of the Parliament may now be effected in only two ways, viz; by expiration of the mandates of the 1 Anson, Law and Custom of the Constitution, p. 203. 2 Anson, Law and Custom of the Parliament, pp. 203, 204. 3 May, Parliamentary Practice, p. 42 ff. 4 Anson, Law and Custom of the Parliament, p. 64. members of the House of Commons, at the end of seven years from the first assembly of the Parliament, and by order of the Crown terminating the mandates of the members of the existing House of Commons and ordering new elections. The former method of dissolution was until recently somewhat modified by the demise of the Crown, either during a parliamentary term or a dissolution. The statute of 30 & 31 Victoria, c. 102, has now removed this modification entirely. The latter method of dissolution is formally effected by the exercise of a Crown prerogative; but, as a fact, the act is provoked by the Prime Minister, the chief representative of the majority party in the House of Commons. It should therefore be at least referred to, in this connection. It is possible, indeed, that the ministers may lose the support of the majority in the House of Commons, and may still move the Crown to order a dissolution of Parliament, by convincing the Crown that the majority of the constituencies of the House of Commons no longer support the views of the majority in the existing house.1 This can only be determined by the new election. The ministers can exercise this influence over the Crown, however, only by virtue of having been the leaders of the majority in the House of Commons, and through the view that the failure to receive the support of that majority, in the particular case, is accidental and can be repaired by going to the constituencies. 7. The Principle of the Quorum. The number of members whose presence is necessary in order to proceed lawfully with business is fixed by each house for itself. This subject belongs, therefore, under the topic of the organization and rules of procedure of each house. I refer to it here only to preserve the heading for the examination of other constitutions, which determine the quorum by constitutional law. The quorum in each house is placed at an 1 Bagehot, The English Constitution, p. 83. arbitrary number, and a very low number, viz; 40 in the Commons and 3 in the Lords.1 8. The Internal Organization of the Houses of Parliament. The House of Commons elects its own speaker.2 In his absence, the chairman of the committee of ways and means. acts as speaker. In the House of Lords the speaker is, by the custom of the constitution, the Lord Chancellor, a member of the ministry, i.e. one of the chiefs of the party in majority in the House of Commons. He may, therefore, be a commoner; and for this, among other reasons, the woolsack upon which the speaker sits is placed outside of the limits of the house. In the absence of the Lord Chancellor one of the deputy speakers appointed under the great seal, i.e. nominally by the Crown, may preside. If none of these be present, the Lords may elect a speaker for the occasion. The other officers of both houses are permanent and appointed by the Crown.5 6 Each house has entire and exclusive control of its rules of procedure. Each house has in like manner the exclusive power of fixing and regulating its rules of discipline. Even though Parliament should undertake to control this subject by statute, the ultimate interpretation of the statute is made by each house for itself, and no court can interfere with or inquire into the same. Nothing short of a crime committed in the House of Commons, or by its order, will warrant the intervention of the regular judicial power;7 and not even under these circumstances will the judicial power intervene in the case of the House of Lords. In the exercise of its disciplinary powers either house may fine, commit to prison or expel a member. Each house may also commit an outsider for contempt. A commitment by the 1 May, Parliamentary Practice, p. 220. 2 Anson, Law and Custom of the Constitution, p. 55 ff., 132. 8 Ibid. p. 132. 4 Ibid. p. 202 ff. 5 Ibid. pp. 133, 203. 6 Ibid. pp. 155, 156, 205. 7 Ibid. p. 155. House of Commons is limited to the duration of the session. It therefore cannot order imprisonment for any fixed period, since prorogation or dissolution may be ordered at any time. The House of Lords, on the other hand, may commit for a definite time, and if this time has not expired at the date of prorogation, the prisoner is not released by prorogation.1 9. The Mode of Legislation. As we have already seen, in dealing with this topic in the constitution previously treated, there are three general stages in the process of legislation. The first is the initiation of the project, the second is the passage of the same through the houses, and the third is the executive approval. In the British system there are three general methods of initiating a project, dependent upon the character of its subject-matter. If the project contains public matter only, and does not propose the raising or appropriation of money, it may be originally proposed in either house and by any member thereof. In the Commons, the member must have fulfilled the form of asking leave of the house to bring in the bill, and have received permission to do so. In the Lords, this is not necessary.2 There are, however, two exceptions to this manner of initiating legislation upon public matters not affecting taxation or appropriation, viz; bills relating to religion and those relating to trade. Such propositions must be first considered in committee of the whole house, and introduced into the house upon recommendation of the committee. Any member may introduce the subject in the committee. If the project proposes the raising or appropriation of money, it can be introduced only in the committee of the whole of the House of Commons, and, in the case of appro 1 Anson, Law and Custom of the Constitution, pp. 156, 157, 192, 205; May, Parliamentary Practice, p. 104 ff. 2 May, Parliamentary Practice, p. 484. 8 Anson, Law and Custom of the Constitution, pp. 225, 226. |