Online Encyclopedia
Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.
HISTORY OF THE BRITISH
Online EncyclopediaEncyclopedia Home :: HIG-HOR
del.icio.us it!
|
See also:HISTORY OF THE See also:BRITISH See also:PARLIAMENT
The Anglo-Saxon Polity.—The origin of parliament is to be traced to Anglo-Saxon times. The Angles, See also:Saxons and other See also:Teutonic races who conquered See also:Britain brought to their new homes their own See also:laws and customs, their settled framework of society, their kinship, their See also:village communities, and a certain See also:rude See also:representation in See also:local affairs. And we find in the Anglo-Saxon polity, as See also:developed during their See also:rule in See also:England, all the constituent parts of parliament. In their own lands they had chiefs and leaders, but no See also:kings. But See also:conquest and territorial See also:settlement were followed by the See also:assumption of royal dignities; and the victorious chiefs were accepted by their followers as kings. They were See also:quick to assume the traditional attributes of See also:royalty. A See also:direct descent from their See also:god See also:Woden, and hereditary right, at once clothed them with a See also:halo of See also:glory and with supreme See also:power; and, when the See also:pagan deity was deposed, the See also: But centuries were to pass before the See also:English See also:nobility was to assume its See also:modern See also:character and denominations. At the See also:head of each village was an eorl, the See also:chief of the freemen, or ceorls—their See also:leader in See also:war and See also:patron in See also:peace. The king's gesiths and thegns formed another privileged class. Admitted to offices in the king's See also:household and See also:councils, and enriched by grants of See also:land, they gradually formed a feudal nobility.
The revival of the Christian See also: The See also:hundred-moot assumed a more representative character, comprising the reeve and a selected number of freemen from the several townships and burghs within the hundred. The shire-moot, or shire-gemot, was an See also:assembly yet more important. An ealdorman was its See also:president, and exercised a See also:jurisdiction over a shire, or See also:district comprising several hundreds. Attended by a reeve and four freemen from every hundred, it assumed a distinctly representative character. Its members, if not elected (in the modern sense) by the popular See also:voice, were, in some See also:fashion, deputed to See also:act on behalf of those whose interests they had come to guard. The shire-moot was also the See also:general folk-moot of the tribe, assembled in arms, to whom their leaders referred the decision of questions of peace and war. See also:Superior to these local institutions was the witenagemot, or assembly of See also:wise men, with whom the king took counsel in legislation and the government of the state. This national council was the true beginning of the parliament of England. Such a council was originally held in each of the kingdoms commonly known as the See also:Heptarchy; and after their See also:union in a single realm, under King See also:Edgar, the witenagemot became the deliberative and legislative assembly, or parliament, of the extended See also:estate. The witenagemot made laws, imposed taxes, concluded See also:treaties, advised the king as to the disposal of public lands and the See also:appointment and removal of See also:officers of state, and even assumed to elect and depose the king himself. The king had now attained to greater power, and more royal dignities and prerogatives. He was unquestionably the chief power in the witenagemot; but the laws were already promulgated, as in later times, as having been agreed to with the advice and consent of the witan. The witan also exercised jurisdiction as a supreme See also:court. These See also:ancient customs See also:present further examples of the continuity of English constitutional forms. The constitution of the witenagemot, however, was necessarily less popular than that of the local moots in the hundred or the shire. The king himself was generally present; and at his See also:summons came prelates, abbots, ealdormen, the king's gesiths and thegns, officers of state and of the royal household, andleading tenants in chief of lands held from the See also:crown. Crowds sometimes attended the meetings of the witan, and shouted their acclamations of approval or dissent; and, so far, the popular voice was associated with its deliberations; but it was at a distance from all but the inhabitants of the place in which it was assembled, and until a See also:system of representation (q.v.) had slowly grown up there could be no further See also:admission of the people to its deliberations. In the town-moot the whole See also:body of freemen and cultivators of the folk-lands met freely under a spreading See also:oak, or on the village See also:green; in the hundred-moot, or shiregemot, deputies from neighbouring communities could readily find a place; but all was changed in the wider council of a king-dom. When there were many kingdoms, distance obstructed any general gathering of the Commons; and in the wider See also:area of England such a gathering became impossible. Centuries were yet to pass before this obstacle was to be overcome by representation; but, in the meantime, the local institutions of the Anglo-Saxons were not without their influence upon the central council. The self-government of a free people informed the bishops, ealdormen, ceorls and thegns who dwelt among them of their interests and needs, their sufferings and their wrongs; and, while the popular forces were increasing with an advancing society, they See also:grew more powerful in the councils of their rulers. Another circumstance must not be overlooked in estimating the political influence of the people in Anglo-Saxon times. For five centuries the See also:country was convulsed with incessant See also:wars —wars with the Britons, whom the invaders were See also:driving from their homes, wars between the several kingdoms, wars with the Welsh, wars with the Picts, wars with the Danes. How could the people continue to assert their civil rights amid the clash of arms and a frequent See also:change of masters? The See also:warrior-kings and their armed followers were rulers in the land which they had conquered. At the same time the unsettled See also:condition of the country repressed the social See also:advancement of its people. See also:Agriculture could not prosper when the See also:farm of the husbandman See also:top often became a battlefield. See also:Trade could not be extended without See also:security to See also:property and See also:industry. Under such conditions the See also:great body of the people continued as peasants, handicraftsmen and slaves. The time had not yet come when they could make their voice heard in the councils of the state.
The See also:Norman Conquest.—The Anglo-Saxon polity was suddenly overthrown by the Norman Conquest. A stern See also:foreign king had seized the crown, and was prepared to rule his conquered realm by the See also:sword. He brought with him the absolutist principles of See also:continental rulers, and the advanced feudal system of See also:France and See also:Normandy. See also:Feudalism had been slowly gaining ground under the Saxon kings, and now it was firmly established as a military organization. See also: The king claimed the broad lands of England as his own, by right of conquest; and when he allowed his warriors to See also:share the spoil he attached the strict condition of military service in return for every See also: The ruling See also:powers, if combined, would have reduced the people to See also:slavery; but their divisions proved a continual source of weakness. In the meantime the strong rule of the See also:Normans, See also:bitter as it was to Englishmen, repressed See also:intestine wars and the disorders of a divided realm. Civil See also:justice was fairly administered. When the spoils of the conquerors had been secured, the rights of property were protected, industry and trade were See also:left free, and the occupation of the soil by foreigners drove See also:numbers of landowners and freemen into the towns, where they prospered as merchants, traders and artificers, and collected thriving populations of townsmen. Meanwhile, foreign rulers having brought England into closer relations with the See also:Continent, its See also:commerce was extended to distant lands, ports and See also:shipping were encouraged, and English traders were at once enriched and enlightened. Hence new classes of society were growing, who were eventually to become the Commons of England. The Crown, the Barons, the Church and the People.—While these social changes were steadily advancing, the barons were already preparing the way for the assertion of popular rights. Ambitious, turbulent and grasping, they were constantly at issue with the Crown. Enjoying vast estates and great commands, and sharing with the prelates the government of the state, as members of the king's council, they were ever ready to raise the See also:standard of revolt. The king could always See also:count upon barons faithful to his cause, but he also appealed for aid to the Church and the people. The baronage was thus broken by insurrections, and decimated by civil wars, while the value of popular alliances was revealed. The power of the people was ever increasing, while their oppressors were being struck down. The See also:population of the country was still Saxon; they had been subdued, but had not been driven forth from the land, like the Britons in former invasions. The English See also:language was still the See also:common speech of the people; and Norman See also:blood was being mingled with the broader stream of Saxon See also:life. A continuous See also:nationality was thus preserved, and was outgrowing the foreign See also:element.
The Crown was weakened by disputed successions and foreign wars, and the baronage by the blood-stained See also:fields of civil war-fare; while both in turn looked to the people in their troubles. Meanwhile the Church was struggling, alike against the Crown and the barons, in See also:defence of its ecclesiastical privileges and temporal possessions. Its clergy were brought by their spiritual ministrations into See also:close relations with the people, and their culture contributed to the intellectual growth of English society. When William See also:Rufus was threatened by his armed barons he took counsel with Archbishop See also:Lanfranc, and promised See also:good laws and justice to the people. His promises were broken; but, like later charters, as lightly set aside, they were a recognition of the political rights of the people. By the See also:charter of See also: So strong-willed a king, who could cripple his too powerful nobles, and forge shackles for the Church, was not predisposed to extend the liberties of his people; but they supported him loyally in his See also:critical struggles; and his vigorous reforms in the839
administrative, judicial and See also:financial organization of his realm promoted the prosperity and political influence of the Commons. At the same time the barons created in this and the two previous reigns, being no longer exclusively Norman in blood and connexion, associated themselves more readily with the interests and sympathies of the people. `Under See also:Richard I. the principle of representation was somewhat advanced, but it was confined to the See also:assessment and collection of taxes in the different shires.
Magna Carta (q.v.).—It was under King See also: But one hundred and fifty years had now passed since the Conquest, and great advances had been made in the condition of the people, and more particularly in the population, See also:wealth and self-government of towns. Many had obtained royal charters, elected their own magistrates, and enjoyed various commercial privileges. They were already a power in the state, which was soon to be more distinctly recognized. The charter of King John was again promulgated under Henry III., for the See also:sake of a See also:subsidy: and henceforth the Commons learned to insist upon the redress of grievances in return for a grant of See also:money. This reign was memorable in the history of parliament). Again the king was in conflict with his barons, who rebelled against his See also:gross misgovernment of the realm. See also:Simon de See also:Montfort, earl of See also:Leicester, was a patriot in advance of his See also:age and fought for the English people as well as for his own order. The barons, indeed, were doubtful See also:allies of the popular cause, and leaned to the king rather than to Simon. But the towns, the clergy, the See also:universities and large bodies of the commonalty rallied See also:round him, and he overthrew the king and his followers at See also:Lewes. He was now master of the realm, and proclaimed a new constitution. Kings had made promises, and granted illusory charters; but the See also:rebel earl called an English parliament (1265) into being. Churchmen were on his See also:side, and a few barons; but his See also:main reliance was upon the Commons. He summoned to a national council, or parliament, bishops, abbots, earls and barons, together with two knights from every shire and two burgesses from every See also:borough. Knights had indeed been summoned to former councils; but never until now had delegates from the towns been invited to sit with bishops, barons and knights of the shire. In the reign of Edward I. parliament assumed substantially its present See also:form of king, lords and commons. The irregular and unauthorized See also:scheme of Simon de Montfort was fully adopted; and in 1295 the king summoned to a parliament two knights from • In 1254 we have a distinct See also:case of two knights summoned from each shire by royal writ. A war was going on in See also:Gascony, and the king wanted money. He called the barons and asked if they would provide the necessary funds. The barons said that unfortunately the See also:minor gentry were exceedingly unwilling to See also:con-See also:tribute, and the king sent to ask that two knights from each shire might be sent up to consult with him. In the result, the Commons refused to grant a subsidy, and the king had to fall back on the Church; but though the summoning of the knights of the shire was in form a small change from the previous practice of sending some one down to the counties to put pressure on them, the innovation is important as the first occasion on which their representatives met in a central assembly.—[H. Ca.] every shire chosen by the freeholders at the shire court, and two burgesses from every See also:city, borough and leading town.' The rebel earl had enlarged the basis of the national council; and, to secure popular support, the politic king accepted it as a convenient See also:instrument of See also:taxation. The knights and freeholders had increased in numbers and wealth; and the towns, continually advancing in population, trade and commerce, had become valuable contributors to the See also:revenue of the state. The grant of subsidies to the Crown, by the assembled baronage and representatives of the shires and towns, was a legal and comprehensive See also:impost upon the entire realm. See also:Secession of the Clergy.—It formed part of Edward's policy to embrace the clergy in his scheme for the representation of all orders and classes of his subjects. They were summoned to attend the parliament of 1295 and succeeding parliaments of his reign, and their form of summons has been continued until the present time; but the clergy resolutely held aloof from the national council, and insisted upon voting their subsidies in their own convocations of See also:Canterbury and See also:York. The bishops retained their high place among the earls and barons, but the clergy sacrificed to ecclesiastical jealousies the See also:privilege of sharing in the political councils of the state. As yet, indeed, this privilege seemed little more than the voting of subsidies, but it was soon to embrace the redress of grievances and the framing of laws for the general welfare of the realm. This great power they forfeited; and who shall say how it might have been wielded, in the interests of the Church, and in the legislation of their country? They could not have withstood the See also:Reformation; they would have been forced to yield to the power of the Crown and the heated See also:resolution of the laity; but they might have saved a large share of the endowments of the Church, and perhaps have modified the doctrines and formularies of the reformed See also:establishment. Reluctance of the Commons to Attend.—Meanwhile the Commons, unconscious of their future power, took their humble place in the great council of the realm. The knights of the shire, as lesser barons, or landowners of good social See also:standing, could sit beside the magnates of the land without constraint; but modest traders from the towns were overawed by the power and dignity of their new associates. They knew that they were summoned for no other purpose than the taxing of themselves and their See also:fellow townsmen; their attendance was irksome; it interrupted their own business; and their journeys exposed them to many hardships and dangers. It is not surprising that they should have shrunk from the exercise of so doubtful a privilege. Considerable numbers absented themselves from a thankless service; and their constituents, far from exacting the attendance of their members, as in modern times, begrudged the sorry See also:stipend of 2S. a See also:day, paid to their representatives while on See also:duty, and strove to evade the See also:burden imposed upon them by the Crown. Some even See also:purchased charters, withdrawing franchises which they had not yet learned to value. Nor, in truth, did the representation of towns at this See also:period afford much See also:protection to the rights and interests of the people. Towns were enfranchised at the will or caprice of the Crown and the sheriffs; they could be excluded at See also:pleasure; and the least show of See also:independence would be followed by the omission of another writ of ' It now appears that substantially this was effected as See also:early as 1275. The transition period between Simon de Montfort's parliament of 1265 and the " See also:model parliament " of 1295 was long a See also:puzzle to See also:historical students, since, except for two provincial councils in 1283, no trace was found in the records, between 1265 and 1295, of the representation—of cities or boroughs, or of representation of the counties between 1275 and 1290. But in 1910 Mr C. Hilary Jenkinson (see English Historical See also:Review, for See also:April) found in the See also:Record See also:Office some old documents which proved to be fragments of three writs and of returns of members for the See also:Easter parliament of 1275. They make it certain that knights of the shire were then present, and that burgesses and citizens were summoned (not as in 1265 through the mayors, but as since 1295 through the sheriffs). The importance of the 1295 parliament thus appears to be smaller in English constitutional history, the full reforms appearing to have been adopted 20 years earlier. It is noteworthy, however, that in the writs of 1275 the instruction to the sheriff is " venire facias," not " eligi facias."—[H, Ch.]summons. But the principle of representation (q.v.), once established, was to be developed with the expansion of society; and the despised burgesses of Edward I., not having seceded, like the clergy, were destined to become a potential class in the parliaments of England. Sitting of Parliament at See also:Westminster.—Another constitutional change during this reign was the summoning of parliament to Westminster instead of to various towns in different parts of the country. This See also:custom invested parliament with the character of a settled institution, and constituted it a high court for the See also:hearing of petitions and the redress of grievances. The growth of its judicature, as a court of See also:appeal, was also favoured by the fixity of its place of meeting. Authority of Parliament recognized by See also:Law.—Great was the power of the Crown, and the king himself was bold and statesman-like; but the union of classes against him proved too strong for See also:prerogative. In 1297, having outraged the Church, the barons, and the Commons, by illegal exactions, he was forced to confirm the Great Charter and the Charter of Forests, with further securities against the taxation of the people without their consent and, in return, obtained timely subsidies from the parliament. Henceforth the financial necessities of a succession of kings ensured the frequent assembling of parliaments. Nor were they long contented with the humble See also:function of voting subsidies, but boldly insisted on the redress of grievances and further securities for national liberties. In 1322 it was declared by See also:statute 15 Edw. II. that " the matters to be established for the estate of the king and of his heirs, and for the estate of the realm and of the people, should be treated, accorded, and established in parliament, by the king, and by the assent of the prelates, earls and barons, and the commonalty of the realm, according as had been before accustomed." The constitutional powers of parliament as a legislature were here amply recognized —not by royal charter, or by the occasional exercise of prerogative, but by an authoritative statute. And these powers were soon to be exercised in a striking form. Already parliament had established the principle that the redress of grievances should have See also:precedence of the grant of subsidies; it had maintained the right of approving councillors of the Crown, and punishing them for the abuse of their powers; and in 1327 the king himself was finally deposed, and the succession of his son, Edward III., declared by parliament. Union of Knights of the Shire and Burgesses.—At this period the constitution of parliament was also settling down to its later and permanent shape. Hitherto the different orders or estates had deliberated separately, and agreed upon their several grants to the Crown. The knights of the shire were naturally See also:drawn, by social ties and class interests, into See also:alliance with the barons; but at length they joined the citizens and burgesses, and in the first parliament of Edward III. they are found sitting together as " the Commons." This may be taken as the turning point in the political history of England. If all the landowners of the country had become united as an order of nobles, they might have proved too strong for the development of national liberties, while the union of the country gentlemen with the burgesses formed an estate of the realm which was destined to prevail over all other powers. The withdrawal of the clergy, who would probably have been led by the bishops to take part with themselves and the barons, further strengthened the united Commons. Increasing Influence of Parliament.—The reign of Edward III. witnessed further advances in the authority of parliament, and changes in its constitution. The king, being in continual need of subsidies, was forced to summon parliament every See also:year, and in order to encourage its liberality he frequently sought its advice upon the most important issues of peace or war, and readily entertained the petitions of the Commons praying for the redress of grievances. During this reign also, the advice and consent of the Commons, as well as of the Lords spiritual and temporal, was regularly recorded in the enacting part of every statute.
Separation of the Two Houses.—But a more important event is to be assigned to this reign, the formal separation of parliament into the two houses of Lords and Commons. There is no See also:evidence—nor is it probable—that the different estates ever voted together as a single assembly. It appears from the rolls of parliament that in the early part of this reign, the causes of summons having been declared to the assembled estates, the three estates deliberated separately, but afterwards delivered a collective See also:answer to the king. While their deliberations were See also:short they could be conducted apart, in the same chamber; but, in course of time, it was found convenient for the Commons to have a chamber of their own, and they adjourned their sittings to the See also:chapter-house of the See also: Their petitions, together with the king's answers, were recorded in the rolls of parliament; but it was not until the parliament had been discharged from attendance that statutes were framed by the See also:judges and entered on the statute rolls. Under such conditions legislation was, in truth, the prerogative of the Crown rather than of parliament. Enactments were often found in the statutes at variance with the petitions and royal answers, and neither prayed for by the Commons nor assented to by the Lords. In vain the Commons protested against so See also:grave an abuse of royal authority; but the same practice was continued during this and succeeding reigns. Henry V., in the second year of his reign, promised " that nothing should be enacted to the petitions of the Commons, contrary to their asking, whereby they should be See also:bound without their assent; " but, so long as the old method of framing laws was adhered to, there could be no security against abuse; and it was not until the reign of Henry VI. that the introduction of the more regular system of legislating by See also:bill and statute ensured the thorough agreement of all the estates in the several provisions of every statute. Increasing Boldness of the Commons.—The Commons, however, notwithstanding these and other discouragements, were constantly growing bolder in the assertion of their rights. They now ventured to brave the displeasure of the king, without seeking to shelter themselves behind powerful barons, upon whose forwardness in the national cause they could not reckon. Notably in 1376 their stout See also:Speaker, See also:Peter de la See also:Mare, inveighed, in their name, against the gross mismanagement of the war, impeached ministers of the realm, complained of the heavy burdens under which the people suffered, and even demanded that a trueaccount.should be rendered of the public See also:expenditure. The brave Speaker was See also:cast into See also:prison, and a new parliament was summoned which speedily reversed the resolutions of the last. But the See also:death of the king changed the aspect of affairs. Another parliament was called, when it was found that the spirit of the Commons was not subdued. Peter de la Mare was released from prison, and again elected to the See also:chair. The demands of the former parliament were reiterated with greater boldness and persistence, the evil councillors of the See also:late reign were driven out, and it was conceded that the See also:principal officers of state should be appointed and removed, during the minority of Richard II., upon the advice of the lords. The Commons also insisted upon the See also:annual assembling of parliament under the stringent provisions of a binding law. They claimed the right, not only of voting subsidies, but of appropriating them, and ofexamining public accounts. They inquired into public abuses, and impeached ministers of the Crown. Even the king himself was deposed by the parliament. Thus during this reign all the great powers of parliament were asserted and exercised. The foreign wars of Henry IV. and Henry V., by continuing the financial necessities of the Crown, maintained for a while the powers which parliament had acquired by the struggles of centuries. Relapse of See also:Parliamentary Influence.—But a period of civil wars and disputed successions was now at See also:hand, 'which checked the further development of parliamentary liberties. The effective power of a political institution is determined, not by assertions of authority, nor even by its legal recognition, but by the See also:external forces by which it is supported, controlled or overborne. With the close of the Wars of the See also:Roses the life of parliament seems to have well-nigh expired. To this constitutional relapse various causes contributed at the same period. The Crown had recovered its absolute supremacy. The powerful baronage had been decimated on the battlefield and the See also:scaffold; and vast estates had been confiscated to the Crown. Kings had no longer any dread of their prowess as defenders of their own order or party, or as leaders of the people. The royal See also:treasury had been enriched by their ruin; while the close of a long succession of wars with France and See also:Scotland relieved it of that continual drain which had reduced the Crown to an unwelcome dependence upon parliament. Not only were the fortunes of the baronage laid See also:low, but feudalism was also dying out in England as on the continent. It was no longer a force which could See also:control the Crown; and it was being further weakened by changes in the See also:art of war. The mailed horseman, the See also:battle-See also:axe and See also:cross-See also:bow of the burgher and See also:yeoman, could not See also:cope with the See also:cannon and See also:arquebus of the royal army. In earlier times the Church had often stood forth against the domination of kings, but now it was in passive submission to the See also:Throne. The prelates were attracted to the court, and sought the highest offices of state; the inferior clergy had long been losing their influence over the laity by their See also:ignorance and want of moral See also:elevation at a period of increasing enlightenment; while the Church at large was weakened by schisms and a wider freedom of thought. Hence the Church, like the baronage. had ceased to be a check upon the Crown. Meanwhile what had become of the ever-growing power of the Commons? It is true they had lost their stalwart leaders, the armed barons and outspoken prelates, but they had them-selves advanced in numbers, riches and enlightenment; they had overspread the land as knights and freeholders, or dwelt in populous towns enriched by merchandise. Why could they not find leaders of their own? Because they had lost the liberal franchises of an early age. All freeholders, or suitors present at the See also:county court, were formerly entitled to See also:vote for a See also:knight of the shire; but in the eighth year of Henry VI. (1430) an act was passed (c. 37) by which this right was confined to 40S. freeholders, See also:resident in the county. Large numbers of See also:electors were thus disfranchised. In the view of parliament they were " of no value," and complaints had been made that they were under the influence of the nobles and greater landowners; but a popular element had been withdrawn from the county representation, and the restricted See also:franchise cannot have impaired the influence of the nobles.
As for the cities and boroughs, they had virtually renounced their electoral privileges. As we have seen, they had never valued them very highly; and now by royal charters, or by the usurpation of small self-elected bodies of burgesses, the choice of members had fallen into the hands of town councils and neighbouring landowners. The anomalous system of close and nomination boroughs, which had arisen thus early in English history, was suffered to continue without a check for four centuries, as a notorious blot upon a free constitution.
All these changes exalted the prerogatives of the Crown. Amid the clash of arms and the strife of hostile parties the voice of parliament had been stifled; and, when peace was restored, a
powerful king could dispense with an assembly which might prove troublesome, and from whom he rarely needed. help. Hence for a period of two hundred years, from the reign of Henry VI. to that of See also: The institution retained its form and constituent parts; its rights and privileges were theoretically recognized, but its freedom and national character were little more than shadows. The Three Estates of the Realm.—This check in the fortunes of parliament affords a fitting occasion for examining the See also:composition of each of the three estates of the realm. Lords Spiritual and Temporal.—The archbishops and bishops had held an eminent position in the councils of Saxon and Norman kings, and many priors and abbots were from time to time associated with them as lords spiritual, until the suppression of the monasteries by Henry VIII. They generally outnumbered their brethren, the temporal peers, who sat with them in the same assembly. The lords temporal comprised several dignities. Of these the See also:baron, though now the lowest in rank, was the most ancient. The See also:title was See also:familiar in Saxon times, but it was not until after the Norman Conquest. that it was invested with a distinct feudal dignity. Next in antiquity was the earl, whose See also:official title was known to Danes and Saxons, and who after the Conquest obtained a dignity See also:equivalent to that of count in foreign states. The highest dignity, that of See also:duke, was not created until Edward III. conferred it upon his son, Edward the See also:Black See also:Prince. The rank of See also:marquess was first created by Richard II., with precedence after a duke. It was in the reign of Henry VI. that the rank of See also:viscount was created, to be placed between the earl and the baron. Thus the See also:peerage consisted of the five dignities of duke, marquess, earl, viscount and baron. During the 15th See also:century the number of temporal peers summoned to parliament rarely exceeded fifty, and no more than twenty-nine received writs of summons to the first parliament of Henry VII. There were only fifty-nine at the death of See also:Queen Elizabeth. At the See also:accession of William III. this number had been increased to about one hundred and fifty.
Life Peerages.—The several orders of the peerage are alike distinguished by the hereditary character of their dignities. Some life peerages, indeed, were created between the reigns of Richard II. and Henry VI., and several ladies had received life peerages between the reigns of See also: In the reign of Edward I. there were about 275 members, in that of Edward III. 250, and in that of Henry VI. 300. In the reign of Henry VIII. parliament added 27 members for See also:Wales and four for the county and city of See also:Chester, and in the reign of Charles II. 4 for the county and city of See also:Durham. Between the reigns of Henry VIII. and Charles II. 130 members were also added by royal charter.
Parliament under Henry VIII.—To resume the history of parliament at a later period, let us glance at the reign of Henry VIII. Never had the power of the Crown been greater than when this king succeeded to the throne, and never had a. more imperious will been displayed by any king of England. Parliament was at his feet to do his bidding, and the Reformation enormously increased his power. He had become a See also:pope to the bishops; the old nobles who had resisted his will had perished in the See also: Each of the successive reigns inaugurated a new See also:religion. Queen Elizabeth and her Parliaments.—With the reign of Elizabeth commenced a new era in the life of parliament. She had received the royal prerogatives unimpaired, and her hand was strong enough to wield them. But in the long See also:interval since Edward IV. the entire framework of English society had been changed; it was a new England that the queen was called upon to govern. The coarse barons of feudal times had been succeeded by English country gentlemen, beyond the influence of the court, and identified with all the interests and sympathies of their country neighbours. From this class were chosen nearly all the knights of the shire, and a considerable proportion of the members for cities and boroughs. They were generally distinguished by a manly independence, and were prepared to uphold the rights and privileges of parliament and the interests of their constituents. A change no less remarkable had occurred in other classes of society. The country was peopled with yeomen and farmers, far superior to the cultivators of the soil in feudal times; and the towns and seaports had grown into important centres of commerce and manufactures. Advances not less striking had been made in the enlightenment and culture of society. But, above all, See also:recent religious revolutions had awakened a spirit of thought and inquiry by no means confined to questions of faith. The Puritans, hostile to the Church, and jealous of every semblance of See also:Catholic revival, were embittered against the state, which was identified, in their eyes, with many ecclesiastical enormities; and stubborn See also:temper was destined to become a strong See also:motive force in restoring the authority of parliament. The parliaments of Elizabeth, though rarely summoned, displayed an unaccustomed spirit. They discussed the succession to the Crown, the See also:marriage of the queen, and ecclesiastical abuses; they upheld the privileges of the Commons and their right to advise the Crown upon all matters of state; and they condemned the grant of monopolies. The bold words of the Wentworths and Yelvertons were such as had not been heard before in parliament. The conflicts between Elizabeth and the Commons marked the revival of the independence of parliament, and foreshadowed graver troubles at no distant period. Conflicts of James I. with the Commons.—James I., with short-sighted pedantry, provoked a succession of conflicts with the Commons, in which abuses of prerogative were stoutly resisted and the rights and privileges of parliament resolutely asserted. The " remonstrance " of 1610 and the " protestation " of 1621 would have taught a politic ruler that the Commons could no longer be trifled with; but those lessons were lost upon James and upon his See also:ill-fated son. Charles I. and the See also:Commonwealth.—The momentous struggles between Charles I. and his parliaments cannot be followed in this place. The earlier parliaments of this reign fairly represented the See also:earnest and temperate See also:judgment of the country. They were determined to obtain the redress of grievances and to restrain undue prerogatives; but there was no taint of disloyalty to the Crown; there were no dreams of revolution. But the contest at length became embittered, until there was no issue but the arbitrament of the sword. The period of the Great See also:Rebellion and the Commonwealth proved the supreme power of the Commons, when supported by popular forces. Every-thing gave way before them. They raised victorious armies in the field, they overthrew the Church and the House of Lords, and they brought the king himself to the scaffold. It also displayed the See also:impotence of a parliament which has lost the confidence of the country, or is overborne by mobs, by an army, or by the strong will of a See also:dictator. Political Agitation of this Period.--It is to this time of fierce political passions that we trace the origin of political agitation as an organized method of influencing the deliberations of parliament. The whole country was then aroused by passionate exhortations from the See also:pulpit and in the See also:press. No less than thirty thousand political tracts and See also:newspapers during this period have been preserved. Petitions to parliament were multiplied in order to strengthen the hands of the popular leaders. Clamorous meetings were held to stimulate or overawe parliament. Such methods, restrained after the Restoration, have been revived in later times, and now form part of the acknowledged system of parliamentary government. Parliament after the Restoration.—On the restoration of Charles II. parliament was at once restored to its old constitution, and its sittings were revived as if they had suffered no interruption. No outward change had been effected by the late revolution; but that a stronger spirit of resistance to abuses of prerogative had been aroused was soon to be disclosed in the deposition of James II. and " the glorious revolution " of 1688. At this time the full rights of parliament were explicitly declared, and securities taken for the See also:maintenance of public liberties. The theory of a constitutional See also:monarchy and a free parliament was established; but after two revolutions it is curious to observe the indirect methods by which the Commons were henceforth kept in subjection to the Crown and the territorial aristocracy. The representation had long become an illusion. The knights of the shire were the nominees of nobles and great landowners; the borough members were returned by the Crown, by See also:noble patrons or close corporations; even the representation of cities, with greater pretensions to independence, was controlled by See also:bribery. Nor were rulers content with their control of the representation, but, after the Restoration, the infamous system of bribing the members themselves became a recognized instrument of administration. The country gentlemen were not less attached to the principles of rational See also:liberty than their fathers, and would have resisted further encroachments of prerogatives; but they were satisfied with the Revolution settlement and the remedial laws of William III., and no new issue had yet arisen to awaken opposition. Accordingly, they ranged themselves with one or other of the political parties into which parliament was now beginning to be divided, and See also:bore their part in the more measured strifes of the 18th century. From the Revolution till the reign of George III. the effective power of the state was wielded by the Crown, the Church and the territorial aristocracy; but the influence of public See also:opinion since the stirring events of the 17th century had greatly increased. Both parties were constrained to defer to it; and, notwithstanding the flagrant defects in the representation, parliament generally kept itself in See also:accord with the general sentiments of the country. Union of Scotland.—On the union of Scotland' in 1707 important changes were made in the constitution of parliament. The House of Lords was reinforced by the addition of sixteen peers, representing the peerage of Scotland, and elected every parliament; and the Scottish peers, as a body, were admitted to all the privileges of peerage, except the right of sitting in parliament or upon the trial of peers. No prerogative, however, was given to the Crown to create new peerages after the union; and, while they are distinguished by their antiquity, their number is consequently decreasing. To the House of Commons were assigned See also:forty-five members, representing the shires and burghs of Scotland. Parliament under George III.—With the reign of George III. there opened a new period in the history of parliament. Agitation in its various forms, an active and aggressive press, public meetings and political associations, the free use of the right of See also:petition, and a turbulent spirit among the people seriously changed the relations of parliament to the country. And the publication of debates, which was fully established in 1771, at once increased the direct responsibility of parliament to the people, and ultimately brought about other results, to which we shall presently advert. Union of See also:Ireland.—In this reign another important change was effected in the constitution of parliament. Upon the union with Ireland, in 18or, four Irish bishops were added to the lords spiritual, who sat by rotation of sessions, and represented the episcopal body of the Church of Ireland. But those bishops were deprived of their seats in parliament in 1868, on the disestablishment of the Church of Ireland. Twenty-eight representative peers, elected for life by the peerage of Ireland, were admitted to the House of Lords. All the Irish peers were843 also entitled to the privilege of peerage. In two particulars the Irish peerage was treated in a different manner from the peerage of Scotland. The Crown was empowered to create a new Irish peerage whenever three Irish peerages in existence at the time of the. Union have become See also:extinct, or when the number of Irish peers, exclusive of those holding peerages of the United See also:Kingdom, has been reduced to one hundred. And, further, Irish peers were permitted to sit in the House of Commons for any place in Great Britain, forfeiting, however, the privilege of peerage while sitting in the See also:lower house. At the same time one hundred representatives of Ireland were added to the House of Commons. This addition raised the number of members to six hundred and fifty-eight. Parliament now became the parliament of the United Kingdom. Schemes for Improving the Representation.—By the union of Scotland and Ireland the electoral abuses of those countries were combined with those of England. Notwithstanding a defective representation, however, parliament generally sustained its position as fairly embodying the political sentiments of its time. Public opinion had been awakened, and could not safely be ignored by any party in the state. Under a narrow and corrupt electoral system the ablest men in the country found an entrance into the House of Commons; and their rivalry and ambition ensured the See also:acceptance of popular principles and the passing of many remedial See also:measures. As society See also:expanded, and new classes were called into existence, the pressure of public opinion upon the legislature was assuming a more decisive character. The grave defects of the representation were notorious, and some minor electoral abuses had been from time to time corrected. But the fundamental evils—nomination boroughs, limited rights of See also:election, the See also:sale of seats in parliament, the prevalence of bribery, and the enormous expense of elections—though constantly exposed, long held their ground against all assailants. So far back as 1770 Lord See also:Chatham had denounced these flagrant abuses. "Before the end of this century," he said, " either the parliament will reform itself from within, or be reformed with a vengeance from without." In 1782, and again in 1783 and 1785, his distinguished son, William See also:Pitt, condemned the abuses of the representation, and proposed schemes of parliamentary reform. In 1793 Mr See also:Grey (afterwards Earl Grey) submitted a See also:motion on the same subject; but the excesses of the See also:French Revolution, political troubles at See also:home, and exhausting wars abroad discouraged the supporters of reform for many years. Under more favourable conditions the question assumed greater proportions. Lord John See also:Russell especially distinguished him-self in 1820, and in several succeeding years, by the able exposure of abuses and by temperate schemes of reform. His efforts were assisted by the scandalous disclosures of bribery at See also:Grampound, See also:Penryn and See also:East See also:Retford. All moderate proposals were rejected; but the concurrence of a See also:dissolution, on the death of George IV., with the French Revolution in 1830; and an ill-timed See also:declaration of the duke of See also:Wellington that the representation was perfect and could not be improved, suddenly precipitated the memorable crisis of parliamentary reform. It now See also:fell to the See also:lot of Earl Grey, as premier, to be the leader in a cause which he had espoused in his early youth. The Reform Acts of 1832.—The result of the memorable struggle which ensued may be briefly told. By the Reform Acts of 1832 the representation of the United Kingdom was reconstructed. In England, fifty-six nomination boroughs returning one hundred and eleven members were disfranchised; thirty boroughs were each deprived of one member, and See also:Weymouth and See also:Melcombe Regis, which had returned four members, were now reduced to two. Means were thus found for the enfranchisement of populous places. Twenty-two large towns, including See also:metropolitan districts, became entitled to return two members, and twenty less considerable towns acquired the right of returning one member each. The number of county members was increased from ninety-four to one hundred and fifty-nine, the larger counties being divided for the purposes of representation. The elective franchise was also placed upon a new basis. In the boroughs a £io household See also:suffrage was substituted for the narrow and unequal franchises which had sprung up—the rights of freemen, in corporate towns, being alone respected. In the counties, copyholders and leaseholders for terms of years, and tenants at will paying a See also:rent of £50 a year, were added to the 4os. freeholders. By the Scottish Reform Act the number of members representing Scotland was increased from forty-five, as arranged at the union, to fifty-three, of whom thirty were assigned to counties and twenty-three to cities and burghs. In counties the franchise was conferred upon owners of property of £10 a year, and certain classes of leaseholders; in burghs, upon £10 householders, as in England. By the Irish Reform Act, no boroughs, however small, were disfranchised; but the franchise was given to £10 householders, and county constituencies were enlarged. These franchises, however, were extended in 185o, when an £8 household suffrage was given to the boroughs, and additions were made to the county franchises. The hundred members assigned to that country at the union were increased to one hundred and five. Notwithstanding these various changes, however, the See also:total number of the House of Commons was still maintained at six hundred and fifty-eight. The legislature was now brought into closer relations with the people, and became more sensitive to the pressure of popular forces. The immediate effects of this new spirit were perceptible in the increased legislative activity of the reformed parliament, its vigorous grappling with old abuses, and its preference of the public welfare to the narrower interests of classes. But, See also:signal as was the regeneration of parliament, several electoral evils still needed correction. Strenuous efforts were made, with indifferent success, to overcome bribery and corruption, and proposals were often ineffectually made to restrain the undue influence of landlords and employers of labour by the See also:ballot; improvements were made in the See also:registration and polling of electors, and the property qualification of members was abolished. Complaints were also urged that the See also:middle classes had been admitted to power, while the working classes were excluded from the late scheme of enfranchisement. It was not till 1867 however that any substantial advance was made. Increased Power of the Commons.—See also:Prior to the reign of Charles I. the condition of society had been such as naturally to subordinate the Commons to the Crown and the Lords. After the Revolution of 1688 society had so far advanced that, under a free representation, the Commons might have striven with both upon equal terms. But, as by far the greater part of the representation was in the hands of the king and the territorial nobles, the large constitutional powers of the Commons were held safely in check. After 1832, when the representation became a reality, a corresponding authority was asserted by the Commons. For several years, indeed, by See also:reason of the weakness of the Liberal party, the Lords were able successfully to resist the Commons upon many important occasions; but it was soon acknowledged that they must yield whenever a decisive See also:majority of the Commons, supported by public opinion, insisted upon the passing of any measure, however repugnant to the sentiments of the upper house. And it became a political See also:axiom that the Commons alone determined the See also:fate of ministries. Later Measures of Reform.—In 1852, and again in 1854, Lord John Russell introduced measures of parliamentary reform; but constitutional changes were discouraged by the See also:Crimean War. In 1859 Lord See also:Derby's Conservative government See also:pro-posed another scheme of reform, which was defeated; and in 186o Lord John Russell brought in another bill, which was not proceeded with; and the question of reform continued in abeyance until after the death of Lord See also:Palmerston. Earl Russell, who succeeded him as premier, was prompt to redeem former pledges, and hastened to submit to a new parliament, in x866, another scheme of reform. This measure, and theministry by whom it was promoted, were overthrown by a See also:combination of the Conservative opposition and the memorable " See also:cave " of members of the Liberal party. But the popular sentiment in favour of reform, which had for some years been inert, was suddenly aroused by the defeat of a Liberal See also:ministry and the See also:triumph of the party opposed to reform. Lord Derby and his colleagues were now constrained to undertake the settlement of this embarrassing question; and by a See also:strange concurrence of political events and party See also:tactics a scheme far more democratic than that of the Liberal government was accepted by the same parliament, under the auspices of a Conservative ministry. The Reform Acts of x867-1868.—By the English Reform Act of 1867 four corrupt boroughs were disfranchised, and thirty-eight boroughs returning two members were henceforth to return one only. A third member was given to See also:Manchester, See also:Liverpool, See also:Birmingham and See also:Leeds; a second member to Merthyr Tydfil and See also:Salford; the See also:Tower Hamlets were divided into two boroughs, each returning two members; and ten new boroughs were created, returning one member each, with the exception of See also:Chelsea, to which two were assigned. By these changes twenty-six seats were taken from boroughs, while a member was given to the university of See also:London. But before this act came into operation seven other English boroughs were disfranchised by the Scottish Reform Act of 1868, these seats being given to Scotland. Thirteen new divisions of counties were erected, to which twenty-five members were assigned. In counties the franchise of copyholders and See also:lease-holders was reduced from £10 to £5, and the occupation franchise from £50 to £See also:r2. In boroughs the franchise was extended to all occupiers of dwelling-houses rated to the poor-rates, and to lodgers occupying lodgings of the annual value of Do unfurnished. By the Scottish Reform Act of 1868, the number of members representing Scotland was increased from fifty-three to sixty—three new members being given to the shires, two to the universities, and two to cities and burghs. The county franchise was extended to owners of lands and heritages of £5 yearly value, and to occupiers of the rateable value of £14; and the burgh franchise to all occupiers of dwelling-houses paying rates, and to tenants of lodgings of £10 annual value unfurnished. By the Irish Reform Act of 1868 no change was made in the number of members nor in the See also:distribution of seats; but the boroughs of See also:Sligo and See also:Cashel, already disfranchised, were still left without representation. The county franchise was left unchanged; but the borough franchise was extended to occupiers of houses rated at £4, and of lodgings of the annual value of £10 unfurnished. That these changes in the representation—especially the household suffrage in boroughs—were a notable advance upon the reforms of 1832, in the direction of See also:democracy, cannot be questioned. The enlarged constituencies speedily overthrew the ministry to whom these measures were due; and the new parliament further extended the recent scheme of reform by granting to electors the protection of the ballot (q.v.), for which advanced reformers had contended since 1832. Nor was the existing representation long suffered to continue without question. First, it was proposed, in 1872, to extend the household franchise to counties, and this proposal found favour in the country and in the House of Commons; but, the Conservative party having been restored to power in 1874, no measure of that character could be promoted with any prospect of success. At the dissolution of 188o a more general revision of the representation was advocated by leading members of the Liberal party, who were soon restored to power. (T. E. M.; H. CH.) Acts of '884-1885.—The Reform Act of 1884 was ultimately carried with the See also:goodwill of both of the great political parties. The Conservatives resisted Mr See also:Gladstone's See also:attempt to carry a great See also:extension of the franchise before he had disclosed his scheme of redistribution, and the bill was thrown out by the House of Lords in See also:August 1884. But after a See also:conference of Mr Gladstone with Lord See also:Salisbury, to whom the whole scheme was confided, an agreement was reached, and the bill was passed in the autumn session. In the following session (1885) the Redistribution Act was passed. A See also:uniform household and lodger franchise was established in counties and boroughs. If a dwelling was held as part See also:payment for service, the occupier was not deprived of his vote because his home was the property of his master. The See also:obligation was thrown on the overseers of ascertaining whether any other See also:man besides the owner was entitled to be registered as an inhabitant occupier, and the owner was bound to See also:supply the overseers with See also:information. The Registration Acts were otherwise widely amended. Polling-places were multiplied, so that little time need be lost in recording a vote. These and other beneficial changes went a long way towards giving a vote to every one who had a decent home. By the Redistribution of Seats Act 1885 all boroughs with less than 15,000 inhabitants ceased to return a member. These small towns were merged into their counties, and the counties were sub-divided into a great number of single-member constituencies, so that the inhabitants of the disfranchised boroughs voted for the member for the See also:division of the county in which they were situated. Boroughs with less than 5o,000 inhabitants returning two members were in future to return only one, and towns of over roo,000 were divided into See also:separate constituencies, and received additional members in proportion to their population. The members for the City of London were reduced to two, but Greater London, including See also:Croydon, returned sixty. Divided Liverpool returned nine, See also:Glasgow seven, See also:Edinburgh, See also:Dublin and See also:Belfast each four, and so on. Six additional seats were given to England and twelve to Scotland, so that, allowing for a diminution by disfranchisement for corruption, the numbers of the House of Commons were raised to 67o members. Results of Reform since z83a.-From a constitutional stand-point it is important to recognize the results of the successive Reform Acts on the working of parliament as regards the position of the executive on the one hand and the electorate on the other. Before 1832 the functions of ministers were mainly administrative, and parliament was able to See also:deal much as it pleased with their rare legislative proposals without thereby depriving them of office. Moreover, since before that date ministers were, generally speaking, in fact as well as in theory appointed by the king, while the general confidence of the majority in the House of Commons followed the confidence not so much of the electorate as of the Crown, that house was able on occasions to exercise an effective control over foreign policy. Pitt, after 1784, was defeated several times on foreign and domestic issues, yet his resignation was neither expected nor desired. In 1788, when the regency of the prince of Wales appeared probable, and again in 1812, it was generally assumed that it would be in-his power to dismiss his See also:father's ministers and to maintain the Whigs in office without dissolving parliament. This system, while it gave to ministers security of See also:tenure, left much effective freedom of See also:action to the House of Commons. But the Reform Act of 1832 introduced a new order of things. In 1835 the result of a general election was for the first time the direct cause of a change of ministry, and in 1841 a House of Commons was elected for the See also:express purpose of bringing a particular statesman into power. The electorate voted for Sir See also:Robert See also:Peel, and it would have been as impossible for the house then elected to deny him their support as it would be for the See also:college of electors in the United States to exercise their private judgment in the selection of a president. As time went on, and the party system became more closely organized in the enlarged electorate, the voting power throughout the country came to exercise an increasing influence. The premier was now a party leader who derived his power in reality neither from the Crown nor from parliament, but from the electorate, and to the electorate he could appeal if deserted by his parliamentary majority. Unless it was prepared to drive him from the office in which it was elected to support him, that majority would not venture to defeat, or even seriously to modify, his legislative proposals, or to pass any censure on his foreign policy,845
for all such action would now be held to be equivalent to a vote of no confidence. From the passing of the Reform Act of 1867 down to I9o0 (with a single exception due to the lowering of the franchise and the redistribution of seats) the electorate voted alternately for the See also:rival party leaders, and it was the function of the houses elected for that purpose to pass the measures and to endorse the general policy with which those leaders were respectively identified. The See also:cabinet (q.v.), composed of colleagues selected by the See also:prime See also:minister, had practically, though indirectly, become an executive See also:committee acting on behalf of the electorate, that is to say, the majority which returned their party to office; and the House of Commons practically ceased to exercise control over ministers except in so far as a revolt in the party forming the majority could influence the prime minister, or force him to resign or dissolve. Meanwhile, the virtual See also:identification of the electorate with the nation by the successive extensions of the franchise added immensely to its power, the chief See also:limitation being supplied by the Septennial Act. The House of Lords, whatever its nominal rights, came henceforth in practice to exercise restriction rather on the House of Commons than on the will of the electorate, for the acquiescence of the upper house in the decision of the electors, when appealed to on a specific point of issue between the two houses, was gradually accepted by its leaders as a constitutional See also:convention. .
The history of parliament, as an institution, centres in this later period round two points, (A) the See also:friction between Lords and Commons, resulting in proposals for the remodelling of' the upper house, and (B) the changes in See also:procedure within the House of Commons, necessitated by new conditions of See also:work and the See also:desire to make it a more business-like assembly. These two movements will be discussed separately.
A. House of Lords Question.—In the altered position of the House of Lords, the occasional checks given by it to the House of Commons were bound to cause friction with the representatives of the people. In the nature of things this was a See also:matter of importance only when the Liberal party was in power and measures were proposed by the Liberal leaders which involved such extreme changes that the preponderantly Conservative upper house could amend or reject them with some confidence in its action being supported by the electorate. The frequent See also:differences between the two houses during the parliament of 188o-1885, culminating in the postponement by the upper house of the Reform Bill, caused the status of that house to be much discussed during the general election of 1885, and proposals for its " mending or ending " to be freely canvassed on See also:Radical platforms. On the 5th of See also: This was resisted by Mr Gladstone, then prime minister, on the ground that he had never supported an abstract resolution unless he was prepared to follow it up by action, and that the time for this had not arrived. On a division the motion was negatived by 202 votes against 166. The question of the constitution of the House of Lords was much agitated in 1888. The Conservatives were again in power, but many of them thought that it would be prudent to forestall by a moderate reform the more drastic remedies now openly advocated by their opponents. On the other hand, Radicals were disposed to resist all changes involving the maintenance of the hereditary principle, lest they should thereby strengthen the House of Lords. On the gth of March Mr Labouchere again moved his resolution in the House of Commons. Mr W. H. See also: To the representatives of the peers he proposed to add other men who had achieved distinction in a public career. He attached a high importance to the existence of a second chamber. His motion was negatived by 97 votes against 50. On the 26th of April Lord Dunraven with-See also:drew a bill for the reform of the House of Lords on the promise of the government to deal with the matter, and on the 18th of See also:June Lord Salisbury fulfilled this See also:pledge. He introduced a bill on that day to provide for the creation of a limited number of life peers and for the exclusion of unworthy members from the house. Under this measure a See also:maxim-am of five life-peerages in any one year might be created, but the total number was never to exceed fifty. In respect of three out of these five life-peers the choice of the Crown was restricted to judges, generals, admirals, ambassadors, privy councillors and ex-See also:governors of colonies. The two additional life-peers were to be appointed in regard to some See also:special qualification to be stated in the See also:message to the house announcing the intention of the Crown to make the appointment. Power was also to be given to the house to expel members for the period of the current parliament by an address to the Crown praying that their writs of summons might be cancelled. The bill was read a second time on the loth of See also:July, but it met with a See also:cold reception and was dropped. The only outcome of all that was written and said in this year was that in 1889, after the See also:report of a select committee set up in 1888, the Lords made a few changes in their standing orders, among which the order establishing a See also:quorum of thirty in divisions and those for the constitution of standing committees were the most important. The parliament which met at Westminster in August 1892 was more democratic in its tendencies than any of its predecessors. At the beginning of the session of 1893, in the course of which the Home Rule Bill was passed by the House of Commons, government bills were introduced for quinquennial parliaments, for the See also:amendment of registration, and for the limitation of each elector to a single vote. The introduction of these bills served merely as a declaration of government policy, and they were not further pressed. On the 24th of March a resolution in favour of payment of members was carried by 276 votes against 229, and again in 1895 by 176 to 158. But the rejection of the Home Rule Bill by the House of Lords, with the apparent acquiescence of the country, combined with the retirement of Mr Gladstone to weaken the influence of this House of Commons, and small importance was attached to its abstract resolutions. In the ensuing session of 1894 an amendment to the Address condemning the hereditary principle was moved by Mr Labouchere, and carried by 147 to 145. The government, however, holding that this was not the way in which a great question should be raised, withdrew the Address, and carried another without the insertion. In his last public utterance Mr Gladstone directed the See also:attention of his party to the reform of the House of Lords, and Lord Rosebery endeavoured to concentrate on such a policy the energies of his supporters at the general election. But the result of the dissolution of 1895, showing, as it did, that on the chief political issue of the day the electorate had agreed with the House of Lords and had disagreed with the House of Commons, greatly strengthened the upper house, and after that date the subject was but little discussed until the Liberal party again came into power ten years later. The House of Lords claimed the right to resist changes made by the House of Commons until the will of the people had been definitely declared, and its defenders contended that its ultimate dependence un the electorate, now generally acknowledged, rendered the freedom from ministerial control secured to it by its constitution a national safeguard.
In 1907, under the Radical government of Sir H. See also: But no further immediate step was taken. In 1908 a strong committee of the House of Lordswith Lord Rosebery as chairman, which had been appointed in consequence of the introduction by Lord See also:Newton of a bill for reforming the constitution of the upper house, presented an interesting report in favour of largely restricting the hereditary element and adopting a method of selection.
So the question stood when in 5909 matters came to a head through the introduction of Mr See also:Lloyd George's See also:budget. It had always been. accepted as the constitutional right of the House of Lords to reject a financial measure sent up by the Commons but not to amend it, but the rejection of the budget (which was, in point of form, referred to the judgment of the electorate) now precipitated a struggle with the Liberal party, who had persistently denied any right on the part of the upper house to force a dissolution. The Liberal leaders contended that, even if constitutional', the claim of the House of Lords to reject a budget was practically obsolete, and having been revived must now be formally abolished; and they went to the country for a See also:mandate to carry their view into law. The elections of See also:January 1910 gave an unsatisfactory answer, since the two principal parties, the Liberals and the Unionists, returned practically equal; but the Liberal government had also on their side the Irish Nationalist and the Labour parties, which gave them a majority in the House of Commons if they could concentrate the combined forces on the House of Lords question. This Mr See also:Asquith contrived to do; and having introduced and carried through the House of Commons a See also:series of resolutions defining his proposals, he had also tabled a bill which was to be sent up to the House of Lords, when the death of the king suddenly interrupted the course of the constitutional conflict, and gave a breathing-space for both sides to consider the possibility of coming to terms. In June Mr Asquith took the initiative in inviting the leaders of the Opposition to a conference with closed doors, and a series of meetings between four representatives of each side were begun. The government were represented by Mr Asquith, Mr Lloyd George, Mr See also:Birrell and Lord See also:Crewe. The Unionists were represented by Mr See also:Balfour, Lord See also:Lansdowne, Mr See also:Austin See also: " For the purpose of this resolution, a bill shall be considered a money bill if in the opinion of the Speaker it contains only provisions dealing with all or any of the following subjects—namely, the See also:imposition, See also:repeal, remission, alteration or regulation of taxation; charges on the Consolidated Fund or the See also:provision of money by parliament; supply; the See also:appropriation, control or regulation of public money; the raising or See also:guarantee of any See also:loan or the repayment thereof; or matters incidental to those subjects or any of them. " 2. That it is expedient that the powers of the Rouse of Lords, as respects bills other than money hills, be restricted by law, so that any such bill which has passed the House of Commons in three successive sessions and, having been sent up to the House of Lords at least one See also:month before the end of the session, has been rejected by that house in each of those sessions, shall become law without the consent of the House of Lords, on the royal assent being declared: provided that at least two years shall have elapsed between the date of the first introduction of the bill in the House of Commons and the date on which it passes the House of Commons for the third time. For the purpose of this resolution a bill shall be treated as rejected by the house of Lords if it has not been passed by the House of Lords either without amendment or with such amendments only as may be agreed upon by both houses. " 3. That it is expedient to limit the duration of parliament to five years." The Parliament Bill, pro.—" Whereas it is expedient that pro-See also:vision should be made for regulating the relations between the two Houses of Parliament: And whereas it is intended to substitute for the House of Lords as it at present exists a second chamber constituted on a popular instead of hereditary basis, but such substitution cannot be immediately brought into operation: And whereas provision will require hereafter to be made by parliament in a measure effecting such substitution for limiting and defining the powers of the new second-chamber, but it is expedient to make such provision as in this act appears for restricting the existing powers of the House of Lords: Be it therefore enacted by the king's most excellent See also:majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords spiritual and temporal, and Commons, in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows: " I. (I) If a money bill, having been passed by the House of Commons, and sent up to the House of Lords at least one month before the end of the session, is not passed by the House of Lords without amendment within one month after it is so sent up to that house, the bill shall, unless the House of Commons direct to the contrary, be presented to His Majesty and become an act of parliament on the royal assent being signified, notwithstanding that the House of Lords have not consented to the bill. " (2) A money bill means a bill which in the opinion of the Speaker of the House of Commons contains only provisions dealing with all or any of the following subjects—namely, the imposition, repeal, remission, alteration or regulation of taxation; charges on the consolidated fund or the provision of money by parliament; supply; the appropriation, control or regulation of public money; the raising or guarantee of any loan or the repayment thereof ; or matters incidental to those subjects or any of them. " (3) When a bill to which the House of Lords has not consented is presented to His Majesty for assent as a money bill, the bill shall be accompanied by a certificate of the Speaker of the House of Commons that it is a money bill. " (4) No amendment shall be allowed to a money bill which, in the opinion of the Speaker of the House of Commons, is such as to prevent the bill retaining the character of a money bill. " 2. (1) It any bill other than a money bill is passed by the House of Commons in three successive sessions (whether of the same parliament or not), and, having been sent up to the House of Lords at least one month before the end of the session, is rejected by the House of Lords in each of those sessions, that bill shall, on its rejection for the third time by the House of Lords, unless the House of Commons direct to the contrary, be presented to His Majesty and become an act of parliament on the royal assent being signified thereto, notwithstanding that the House of Lords has not consented to the bill: provided that this provision shall not take effect unless two years have elapsed between the date of the first introduction of the bill in the House of Commons and the date on which it passes the House of Commons for the third time. " (2) A bill shall be deemed to be rejected by the House of Lords if it is not passed by the House of Lords either without amendment or with such amendments only as may be agreed to by both houses. " (3) A bill shall be deemed to be the same bill as a former bill sent up to the House of Lords in the preceding session if, when it is sent up to the House of Lords, it is identical with the former bill or contains only such alterations as are certified by the Speaker of the House of Commons to be necessary owing to the time which has elapsed since the date of the former bill, or to represent amendments which have been made by the House of Lords in the former bill in the preceding session. " Provided that the House of Commons may, if they think See also:fit, on the passage of such a bill through the house in the second or third session, suggest any further amendments without inserting the amendments in the bill, and any such suggested amendments shall be considered by the House of Lords, and if agreed to by that house, shall be treated as amendments made by the House of Lords and agreed to by the House of Commons; but the exercise of this power by the House of Commons shall not affect the operation of this See also:section in the event of the bill being rejected by the House of Lords. " 3. Any certificate of the Speaker of the House of Commons given under this act shall be conclusive for all purposes, and shall not be questioned in any court of law. " 4. Nothing in this act shall diminish or qualify the existing rights and privileges of the House of Commons. ' 5. Five years shall be substituted for seven years as the time fixed for the maximum duration of parliament under the Septennial Act 1715." Meanwhile, in the House of Lords, Lord Rosebery had carried three resolutions declaring certain principles for the reform of the second chamber, which were assented to by the Unionist leaders; the policy opposed to that of the government thus became that of willingness for reform of the constitution of the Upper Chamber, but not fcr abolition of its powers. Lord Rosebery's Resolutions.—(1) " That a strong and efficient Second Chamber is not merely an integral part of the British Constitution, but is necessary to the well-being of the State and to the See also:balance of Parliament." (a) " Such a Chamber can best be obtained by the reform and reconstitution of the House of Lords." (3) " That a necessary preliminary to such reform and reconstitution is the acceptance of the principle that the possession of a peerage should no longer of itself give the right to sit and vote in the House of Lords." During the summer and autumn the private meetings between the eight leaders were continued, until twenty had been held. But on the See also:roth of See also:November Mr Asquith issued a brief statement that the conference on the constitutional question had come to an end, without arriving at an agreement. Within a few days he announced that another appeal would at once be made to the electorate. The Parliament Bill was hurriedly introduced into the House of Lords, with a statement by Lord Crewe that no amendments would be accepted. The dissolution was fixed for the 28th of November. Time was short for any declaration of policy by the Unionist peers, but it was given shape at once, first by the See also:adoption of a further resolution moved by Lord Rosebery for the remodel-See also:ling of the Upper House, and secondly by Lord Lansdowne's shelving the Parliament Bill by coupling the See also:adjournment of the debate on it with the adoption of resolutions providing for the settlement of differences between a reconstituted Upper House and the House of Commons. Lord Rosebery's additional resolution provided that " in future the House of Lords shall consist of Lords of Parliament: (a) chosen by the whole body of hereditary peers from among themselves and by nomination by the Crown; (b) sitting by virtue of offices and of qualifications held by them; (c) chosen from outside." The Lansdowne resolutions provided in effect that, when the House of Lords had been " reconstituted and reduced in numbers in accordance with Lord Rosebery's plan, (1) any differences arising between the two houses with regard to a Bill other than a Money in two successive sessions, and within an interval of not less than one year, should be settled, if not adjustable otherwise, in a See also:joint sitting composed of members of both houses, except in the case of " a matter which is of great gravity and has not been adequately submitted to the judgment of the people," which should then be " submitted for decision to the electors by See also:Referendum "; (2) and as to Money Bills, the Lords were prepared to forgo their constitutional right .of rejection or amendment, if effectual provision were made against " tacking," the decision whether other than financial matters were dealt with in the Bill resting with a joint committee of both Houses, with the Speaker of the _House of Commons as chairman, having a casting vote only. The general election took place in See also:December, and resulted practically in no change from the previous situation. Both sides won and lost seats, and the eventual numbers were: Liberals 272, Labour 42, Irish Nationalists 84 (8 being " See also:independents" following Mr William O'Brien), Unionists 272. Thus, including the doubtful votes of the 8 See also:Independent Nationalists, Mr Asquith retained an apparent majority of 126 for the ministerial policy, resting as it did on the determination of the Irish Nationalists to pave the way for Home Rule by destroying the See also:veto of the House of Lords. B. House of Commons See also:Internal Reforms.—We have already sketched the main lines of English parliamentary procedure. Until the forms of the House of Commons were openly utilized to delay the progress of government business by what became known as " obstruction " the changes made in the years following 1832 were comparatively insignificant. They consisted in (I) the discontinuance of superfluous forms, questions and amendments; (2) restrictions of debates upon questions of form; (3) improved arrangements for the distribution of business; (4) the delegation of some of the minor functions of the house to committees and officers of the house; and (5) increased publicity in the proceedings of the house. But with the entry of Mr See also:Parnell and his Irish Nationalist followers into parliament (1875–188o) a new era began in the history of the House of Commons. Their tactics were to oppose all business of whatever See also:kind, and at all See also:hours. It was not until See also:February 188o that the house so far overcame its reluctance to restrict liberty of discussion as to pass, in its earliest form, the rule dealing with " order in debate." It provided that whenever a member was named by the Speaker or chairman as " disregarding the authority of the chair, or abusing the rules of the house by persistently and wilfully obstructing the rules of the house," a motion might be made, to be decided without amendment or debate, for his suspension from the service of the house during the See also:remainder of the sitting; and that if the same member should be suspended three times in one session, his suspension on the third occasion should continue for a See also:week, and until a motion had been made upon which it should be decided, at one sitting, by the house, whether the suspension should then cease or not. The general election, which took place two months later, restored Mr Gladstone to power and to the leadership of the house. Mr Parnell returned to parliament with a more numerous following, and resumed his former tactics. In January 1881 the Protection of Persons and Property (Ireland) Bill was introduced. For twenty-two hours Parnell fought the motion giving precedence to the bill, and for four sittings its introduction. The See also:fourth sitting lasted forty-one hours. Then Mr Speaker See also:Brand intervened, and declined to See also:call on any other member who might rise to address the house, because repeated See also:dilatory motions had been supported by small minorities in opposition to the general sense of the house. He added: " A crisis has thus arisen which demands the prompt interposition of the chair and of the house. The usual rules have proved powerless to ensure orderly and effective debate. An important measure, recommended by Her Majesty nearly a month since, and declared to be urgent in the interests of the state by a decisive majority, is being arrested by the action of an inconsiderable minority, the members of which have resorted to those modes of obstruction which have been recognized by the house as a parliamentary offence. The dignity, the See also:credit, and the authority of this house are seriously threatened, and it is necessary they should be vindicated. . . . Future measures for ensuring orderly debate I must leave to the judgment of the house. But the house must either assume more effectual control over its debates, or entrust greater powers to the chair." The Speaker then put the question, which was carried by an overwhelming majority. Then followed the decisive struggle. Mr Gladstone gave notice for the next day (Feb. 3) of an urgency rule, which ordered, " That if the house shall resolve by a majority of three to one that the state of public business is urgent, the whole power of the house to make rules shall be and remain with the Speaker until he shall declare that the state of public business is no longer urgent." On the next day a See also:scene of great disorder ended in the suspension of the Nationalist members, at first singly, and afterwards in See also:groups. The urgency rule was then passed without further difficulty, and the house proceeded to resolve, " That the state of public business is urgent." The Speaker laid upon the table rules of sufficient stringency, and while they remained in force progress in public business was possible. During this session the Speaker had to intervene on points of order 935 times, and the chairman of committees 939 times; so that, allowing only five minutes on each occasion, the wrangling between the chair and members occupied 15o hours. The events of the session of 1881 and the direct appeal of the Speaker to the house proved the necessity of changes in the rules The See also:closure. of procedure more drastic than had hitherto been proposed. Accordingly, in the first week of the session of 1882 Mr Gladstone laid his proposals on the table, and in moving the first resolution on loth February, he reviewed, in an eloquent speech, the history of the standing orders. It was his opinion, on general grounds, that the house should See also:settle its own procedure, but he showed that the numerous committees which, since 1832, had sat on the subject, had failed for the most part to carry their recommendations into effect from the lack of the requisite " propelling power," and he expressed his regret that the concentration of this power in the hands of the government had rendered it necessary that they should undertake a task not properly theirs. He noted two main features in the history of the case: (T) the constantly increasing labours of the house, and (2) its constantly decreasing power to despatch its duties; and while he declared that " the fundamental change which has occurred is owing to the passing of the first great Reform Bill," he pointed out that the See also:strain had not become intolerable till the development in recent years of ob- structive tactics. He defined obstruction as " the disposition either of the minority of the house, or of individuals, to resist the prevailing will of the house otherwise than by See also:argument," and reached the conclusion that the only remedy for a state of things by which the dignity and efficiency of the house were alike compromised, was the adoption in a carefully guarded form of the See also:process known on the Continent as the " cloture." He explained that in his early years the house was virtually possessed of a closing power, because it was possessed of a means of sufficiently making known its inclinations; and to those inclinations uniform deference was paid by members, but that since this moral See also:sanction had ceased to be operative, it was necessary to substitute for it a written law. The power to close debate had been of necessity assumed by almost all the See also:European and See also:American assemblies, the conduct of whose members was shaped by no traditional considerations; and the entry into parliament of a body of men to whom the traditions of the house were as nothing made it necessary for the House of Commons to follow this example. He proposed, therefore, that when it appeared to the Speaker, or to the chairman of committees, during any debate to be the evident sense of the house, or of the committee, that the question be now put, he might so inform the house, and that thereupon on a motion being made, " That the question be now put," the question under discussion should be forthwith put from the chair, and decided in the affirmative if supported by more than 200 members, or, when less than 40 members had voted against it, by more than Too members. This resolution was vehemently contested by the opposition, who denounced it as an unprecedented interference with the liberty of debate, but was eventually carried in the autumn session of the same year, after a discussion extending over nineteen sittings. On the loth of November the standing order of the 28th of February 1880, providing for the suspension of members who persistently and wilfully obstructed the business of the house or disregarded the authority of the chair, was amended by the in-crease of the See also:penalty to suspension on the first occasion for one week, on the second occasion for a fortnight, and on the third, or any subsequent occasion, for a month. The other rules, framed with a view to freeing the wheels of the parliamentary See also:machine, and for the most part identical with the regulations adopted by Mr Speaker Brand under the urgency resolution of 1881, were carried in the course of the autumn session, and became standing orders on the 27th of November. Mr Gladstone's closure rule verified neither the hopes of its supporters nor the fears of its opponents. It was not put into operation until the loth of February 1885, when the Speaker's declaration of the evident sense of the house was ratified by a majority of 207—a margin of but seven votes over the necessary quorum. It was clear that no Speaker was likely to run the See also:risk of a rebuff by again assuming the initiative unless in the See also:face of extreme urgency, and, in fact, the rule was enforced twice only during the five years of its existence. In 1887 the Conservative government, before the introduction of a new Crimes Act for Ireland, gave efficiency to the rule by an important amendment. They proposed that any member during a debate might claim to move, " That the question be now put," and that with the consent of the chair this question should be put forthwith, and decided without amendment or debate. Thus the initiative was transferred from the Speaker to the house. Mr Gladstone objected strongly to this alteration, chiefly on the ground that it would throw an unfair burden of responsibility upon the Speaker, who would now have to decide on a question of opinion, whereas under the old rule he was only called upon to determine a question of evident fact. The alternative most generally advocated by the opposition was the automatic closure by a See also:bare majority at the end of each sitting, an arrangement by which the chair would be relieved from an invidious responsibility; but it was pointed out that under such a system the length of debates would not vary with the importance of the questions debated. After fourteen sittings the closure rule was passed on the 18th of March and made a standing order. In the next session, on the 28th of February 1888, the rule was yet further strengthened by the reduction of the majority necessary for its enforcement from 200 to 100, the closure rule remaining as follows:— That, after a question has been proposed, a member rising in his place may claim to move, " That the question be now put," and, unless it shall appear to the chair that such motion is an abuse of the rules of the house or an infringement of the rights of the minority, the question, " That the question be now put," shall be put forthwith, and decided without amendment or debate. When the motion " That the question be now put " has been carried, and the question consequent thereon has been decided, any further motion may be made (the assent of the chair as afore-said not having been withheld), which may be requisite to bring to a decision any question already proposed from the chair; and also if a clause be then under See also:consideration, a motion may be made (the assent of the chair as aforesaid not having been with-held), " That the question ' That certain words of the clause defined in the motion stand part of the clause,' or ' That the clause stand part of, or be added to, the bill,' be now put." Such motions shall be put forthwith, and decided without amendment or debate. That questions for the closure of debate shall be decided in the affirmative, if, when a division be taken, it appears by the numbers declared from the chair that not less than one hundred members voted in the majority in support of the motion. The closure, originally brought into being to defeat the tactics of obstruction in special emergencies, thus became a part of The parliamentary routine. And, the principle being Quiliotine. once accepted, its operation was soon extended. The practice of retarding the progress of government measures by amendments moved to every line, adopted by both the great political parties when in opposition, led to the use of what became known as the " See also:guillotine," for forcing through parliament important bills, most of the clauses in which were thus undiscussed. The " guillotine," means that the house decides how much time shall be devoted to certain stages of a measure, definite See also:dates being laid down at which the closure shall be enforced and division taken. On the 17th of June 1887, after prolonged debates on the Crimes Bill in committee, clause 6 only having been reached, the remaining 14 clauses were put without discussion, and the bill was reported in accordance with previous notice. This was the first use of the " guillotine," but the precedent was followed by Mr Gladstone in 1893, when many of the clauses of the Home Rule Bill were carried through committee and on report by the same machinery. To the Conservatives must be imputed the invention of this method of legislation, to their opponents the use of it for attempting to carry a great constitutional innovation to which the majority of English and Scottish representatives were opposed, and subsequently its extension and development (1906—1909) as a regular part of the legislative machinery. The principle of closure has been extended even to the debates on supply. The old rule, that the redress of grievances should SuppI Ruie.precede the granting of money, dating from a time when the minister of the Crown was so far from commanding the confidence of the majority in the House of Commons that he was the chief object of their attacks, nevertheless continued to govern the proceedings of the house in relation to supply without much resultant inconvenience, until the period when the new methods adopted by the Irish Nationalist party created a new situation. Until 1872 it continued to be possible to discuss any subject by an amendment to the motion for going into supply. In that year a resolution was passed limiting the amendments to matters relevant to the class of estimates about to be considered, and these relevant amendments were further restricted to the first day on which it was proposed to go into committee. This resolution was continued in 1873, but was allowed to drop in 1874. It was revived in a modified form in 1876, but was again allowed to drop in 1877. In 1879, on the recommendation of the See also:Northcote committee, it was provided in a sessional order that whenever the committees of supply or of ways and means stood as the first order on a See also:Monday, the Speaker should leave the chair without question put, except on first going into committee on the army, See also:navy and civil service estimates respectively. In 1882 See also:Thursday was added to Monday for the purposes of the order, and, some further exceptions having been made to the operation of the rule, it became a standing order. The conditions, however, under which the estimates were voted remained unsatisfactory. The most useful function of the opposition is the exposure of abuses in the849 various departments of administration, and this can best be performed upon the estimates. But ministers, occupied with their legislative proposals, were irresistibly tempted to postpone the consideration of the estimates until the last See also:weeks of the session, when they were hurried through thin houses, the members of which were impatient to be gone. To meet this abuse, and to distribute the time with some regard to the See also:comparative importance of the subjects discussed, Mr Balfour in 1896 proposed and carried a sessional order for the closure of supply, a maxi-mum of twenty-three days being given to its consideration, of which the last three alone might be taken after the 5th of August. On the last but one of the allotted days at 10 o'See also:clock the chairman was to put the outstanding votes, and on the last day the Speaker was to put the remaining questions necessary to See also:complete the reports of supply. In 1901 Mr Balfour so altered the resolution that the question was put, not with respect to each vote, but to each class of votes in the Civil Service estimates, and to the total amounts of the outstanding votes in the army, navy and revenue estimates. It is only possible here to refer briefly to some other changes in the procedure of the house which altered in various respects its character as a business-like assembly. The chief other of these is as regards the hours. On Mondays, Changes in Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays the house Methods. meets at 2.45 p.m., " questions " beginning at 3 and ending (apart from urgency) at 3.45; and opposed business ends at 1r. On Fridays the house meets at 12 See also:noon, and opposed business is suspended at 5 p.m.; this is the only day when government business has not precedence, and private members' bills have the first call, though at 8.15 p.m. on Tuesdays and Wednesdays up to Easter and on Wednesdays up to Whitsuntide the business is interrupted in order that private members' motions may be taken. These arrangements, which only date from 1906, represent a considerable change from the old days before 1879 when the standing order was formed that no opposed business, with certain exceptions, should be taken after 12.30 a.m., or 1888 when the closing See also:hour was fixed at midnight. In fact the hours of the house have become generally earlier. Another important change has been made as regards motions for the adjournment of the house, which used to afford an opportunity to the private members at any time to discuss matters of urgent importance. Since 1902 no motion for the adjournment of the house can be made until all " questions " have been disposed of, and then, if forty members support it, the debate takes place at 8.15 p.m. This alteration has much modified the character of the debates on such motions, which used to be taken when feelings were hot, whereas now there is time for reflection. In other respects the most noticeable thing in the recent See also:evolution of the House of Commons has been its steady loss of power, as an assembly, in face of the control of the government and party leaders. In former times the private members had far larger opportunities for introducing and carrying bills, which now have no See also:chance, unless the government affords " facilities "; and the great function of debating " supply " has largely been restricted by the closure, under which millions of money are voted without debate. The house is still ruled by technical rules of procedure which are, in the main, dilatory and obstructive, and hamper the expression of views which are distasteful to the Whips or to the government, who can by them arrange the business so as to suit their convenience. It is true indeed that this dilatory character of the proceedings assists to encourage debate, within limits; but with the influx of a new class of representatives, especially the Labour members, there has been in recent years a rather pronounced feeling that the procedure of the house might well be drastically revised with the object of making it a more business-like assembly. Reform of the House of Commons has been postponed to some extent because reform of the House of Lords has, to professed reformers, been a better " cry "; but when reform is once " in the See also:air " in parliament it is not likely to stop, with so large a field of antiquated procedure before it as is represented by many of the traditional methods of the House of Commons. (H. Additional information and CommentsThere are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click, and select "copy." Then paste it into your website, email, or other HTML. Site content, images, and layout Copyright © 2006 - Net Industries, worldwide. |
|
|
[back] HISTORY OF MISSION |
[next] HIT |