BUSINESS IN PARLIAMENT.

THE COMMITTEES or 1848 AND 1854.

NEXT year we are to have a Select Committee on the conduct of public business in Parliament. 'or we assume that the inquiry will take in the two Houses, since the management of one House cannot properly be considered apart from the treatment of mea- sures in the other. The object is to trace the origin and working of present difficulties, and to ascertain an available field for the working out of improvements. Should the Committee be ap- pointed, it will be the third Committee in thirteen years ; and in order that the investigation may be rendered as effectual as pos- sible, it is very desirable that Members should employ the recess in reconsidering the matter. To that end, we would earnestly ad- vise all whom it may concern, to supply themselves with the two reports from the Select Committees of 1848 and 1854, which fur- nished the raw material for a history of the whole question. The Committee of 1848 was so composed that it might be re- garded as possessing a complete mastery of the subject ; the fol- lowing were its Members. Lord John Russell, Sir Robert Peel, Sir George Grey, Sir James Graham, Mr. flume, Mr. Disraeli, the Lord Advocate, Mr. Goulburn, Sir Robert Harry Inglis, Sir William Heathcote, Mr. Cobden, Mr. Morgan John O'Connell, Mr. Henley, Mr. George Alexander Hamilton, Mr. Brotherton, the volunteer officer who had it in charge to adjourn the House at midnight; Mr. Bernal, the Chairman of Committees ; Mr. Greene, another Chairman of Committees ; and Mr. Evelyn Denison, the present Speaker, and the chairman of that particular Committee. The witnesses examined before the Committee were Mr. Shaw Lefevre, the Speaker of that day ; Mr. Edward Curtis, for four years a member of Congress in the United States ; Mr. Josiah Randall, Member of the Legislature of Pennsylvania ; and M. Guizot, the Parliamentary statesman and historian of France.

The object was then as it is now, to ascertain why Parliament could not get through its business. The report ascribed the hindrance to the great amount of Committee business which ex- hausted Members during the morning ; the thin attendance of the House, from the hours of seven to ten,—" necessary in some degree from the exhaustion of the morning labours," and inter- fering in an important manner with the progress of debates ; the practice of the chief speakers to abstain from addressing the House during those " thin " hours ; the constant increase of busi- ness in general ; the obstructive interference of technical rules ; and "the practice of intermingling debates, adjourned one over the head of the other, which has led to confusion, deadening the interest in every subject, and prejudicing the quality of the de-

bates on all." One of the rules which has operated to protract discussion has been the liberty of introducing motions to adjourn the House, for the purpose of speaking on matters not relevant to the prescribed business of the day.' But the regulation moved in that year by Hume, that orders of the day be read without debate, is reported to have "worked admirably." So said Mr. Speaker Lefevre, who made several suggestions, some of which

were adopted. • The Committee submitted the following " recom- mendations "- 'C That when leave shall have been given to bring in a bill, the questions of the first reading and printing shall be decided without debate, or amend- ment moved.

"That when an order of the day shall have been read for the House to resolve itself into a Commiftee of the whole House upon a bill which has already been considered in Committee, Mr. Speaker shall forthwith leave tlie chair without any question put, unless a Member shall have given no- tice of an instruction to such Committee, but such resolution shall not apply to the case where the bill shall have passed through Committee pro forma for the purpose of being reprinted. " That when after due notice it shall have been ordered by the House that orders of the day have precedence of notices of motions, the House may resolve itself into a Committee of Supply or Ways and Means. " That when any Committee of the whole House shall have gone through a bill, and made amendments thereto, the Chairman of such Committee shall report the same forthwith; and that a day be appointed for the further con- sideration of such report. " That on the consideration of the report of a bill any new clauses pro- posed to be added be first offered ; and the House shall then proceed to con- sider the bill, and the amendments made by the Committee. "That in the case of an adjourned debate, it would be of advantage that the debate should be resumed on the next sitting day, and should have pre- cedence over all other business. Your Committee is at the same time aware that there might be public inconvenience in laying down any strict rule upon this subject, fettering the discretion of the House, and compelling the resumption of the adjourned debate in preference to other business as a mat- ter of course. They content themselves with expressing a strong opinion that it would be advisable, both with reference to the satisfactory discussion of the subject under consideration, and to the general progress of public business, that debates should, as far as possible, be continued from day to day ; and that there should be such a relaxation of the rules of the House in respect of the precedence of notices and orders of the day, as to leave the House entire liberty to give precedence on the following day to an adjourned debate.

"That with respect to any bill brought to this House from the House of Lords, or returned by the House of Lords to this House, with amend- ments, whereby any pecuniary penalty, forfeiture, or fee, shall be au- thorized, imposed, appropriated, regulated, varied, or extinguished, this House will not insist on its ancient and undoubted privileges in the follow- ing cases—

"First. When the object of such pecuniary penalty or forfeiture is to secure the execution of the Act, or the punishment or prevention of offences. "Second. Where such fees are imposed in respect of benefit taken, or service rendered under the Act, and in order to the execution of the Act, and are not made payable into the Treasury or Exchequer, or in aid of the public revenue, and do not form the ground of public accounting by the parties receiving the same, either in respect of deficit or surplus. "Third. When such bill shall be a Private Bill for a Local or Personal Act."

The Committee, however, append to these recommendations the following remarks, highly suggestive, and reading just now like the severest of satires on the session of 1860—

" But it is not so much on any new rules, especially restrictive rules, that your Committee would desire to rely for the prompt and efficient despatch of business by the House. The increasing business calla for incrcased con- sideration on the part of Members in the exercise of their individual privi- leges. "Your Committee would desire to rely on the good feeling of the House, and on the forbearance of its Members, and on a general acquiescence in the enforcement by the Speaker of that established rule of the House which requires that Members should strictly confine themselves to matters imme- diately pertinent to the subject of debate. "Your Committee, however, ventures to express an opiuion that the sa- tisfactory conduct and progress of the business of the House must mainly depend upon her Majesty's Government, holding, as they do, the chief con- trol over its management.

"They believe, that by the careful preparation of measures, their early introduction, the judicious distribution of business between the two Houses, and the order and method with which measures are conducted, the Govern- ment can contribute in an essential degree to the easy and convenient conduct of business. They trust the efforts of the Government would be seconded by those of independent Members, and that a general determina- tion would prevail to carry on the public business with regularity and de- spatch."

The Committee of 1854 was decidedly not so strong as that of 1848. We miss particularly Sir Robert Peel and Sir James Gra- ham. The members were,—Sir John Pakington, Lord John Rus- sell, Mr. Disraeli, Mr. Goulburn, Mr. Evelyn Denison, Mr. Sothe- ron, Mr. Thomas Greene, Mr. John Ball, Mr. Wilson Patten, Mr.

Brotherton, Sir George Grey, Mr. Walpole Lord Stanley, Mr. Hume, and Mr. Bright. Sir John Pakingion was called to the chair. The actual recommendations of the Committee were these- " 1. That it be an instruction to all Committees of the whole House to which bills may be committed, that they have power to make such amend- ments therein as they shall think fit, provided they be relevant to the sub- ject-matter of the bill ; but that if any such amendments shall not be within the title of the bill, they do amend the title accordingly, and do report the same specially to the House.

"2. That the questions for reading a bill a first and second time in a Com- mittee of the whole House, be discontinued.

"3. That in going through a bill, no questions shall be put for the filling up words already printed in Italics, and commonly called blanks, unless ex- ception be taken thereto ; and if no alterations have been made in the words so printed in Italics, the bill should be reported without amendments, unless other amendments have been made thereto.

"4. That on a clause being offered, on the consideration of report or third reading of a bill, the Speaker do desire the Member to bring up the same, whereupon it shall be read a first time without question put.

"5. fhat Lords amendments to public bills shall be appointed to be con- sidered on a future day, unless the House in any case shall order them to be considered forthwith.

"6. That every report from a Committee of the whole House be brought up, without any question being put. " 7. That the standing order of the 25th of Tune, 1852, relating to Com- mittees of Supply and Ways and Means, shall be so altered as to allow such Committees to be fixed for any day on which orders of the day shall have precedence of notices of motion. "8. That bills which may be fixed for consideration in Committee on the same day, whether in progress or otherwise, may be referred together to a Committee of thembele House, whichmay aanaider an the same dapall the bills so referred to it, without the chairman leaving the chair on each sepa- rate bill, provided that, with respect to any bill not in progress, if any Member shall raise an objection to its consideration, such bill shall be post-

poned. "9. That the House, at its rising on Friday, do stand adjourned until the following Monday, unless the House shall have otherwise ordered."

Some of the suggestions were accepted—notably not the last. The Committee admitted that these "specific alterations, everevith two or three exceptions, of minor importance." In some "import- ant points" they abstained from recommending any alterations in the rules, "not because they doubted the inconvenience of the ex- isting rides," but they doubted whether the remedy suggested, "applied in the form of anew and stringent rule," would prove effectual. They were "fully sensible" of the time occupied in private business ; but they "did not consider the terms of the re- ference embraced this important branch" of business. They ab- stained from asking for an enlargement of their powers, because they thought thesubjectmight be more advantageously dealt with at a later period, with the experience of that session. And they repeated the passage which we have quoted above, from the report at the Committee in 1848, recommending to Members forbearance in "the exercise of their individual privileges," and strict ad- herence to the subject in debate. Thus the Committee shrunk from grappling with the subject; -repeated the regrets and moral hints which were already stale in 1848; and left us to find, in 1860, precisely the same inconveniences, aggravated by a propor- tionate growth of public business ; while instead of "exercising their individual privileges" with forbearance, it may be said, with scarcely any hyperbole, that Members have wasted the whole session in personal displays and paltry political competitions. Some public business has been done where it was absolutely ne- cessary for the current purposes of administration ; but they have left almost entirely barren of legislation a session begun with peculiar admissions that reforms were urgent, and with peculiar promises of fulfilment.

The degree to which the burden has grown may to a certain extent be measured by the very complaints of those past Commit- tees. In the Report of 1848, we have certain statistics of work done, which we rearrange, to present the results more concisely and clearly.—

1837 1812 1847 In 1848 alone.

7436 14,014 16,397 18,450.

The evil had not diminished when the Committee of 1854 re- ported-

1849. 1850. 1851. 1852. 1852-53.

Sasser CommrrrcEs- Public Matters ['averaging 15 Members) 44.. 39.. 43.. 36.. 51 Railway :5] Private Bills [3 and upwards] 25 „ /35 .. 33.. 37 .. 43 Election [5 each]

BMA-

tPUtdie Introduced 177 _ 204 165 .. 227 .. 200 Passed 111 _ 114 .. 105 .. 88 .. 135 Private: Introduced 180 .. 198 .. 245 .. 264 .. 366 Passed 132 .. 145 .. 179 .. 198 .. 271

rwrrrimvs-

linmber of Public Petitions 2947 16,137 12,021 . 5839 .. 11,164 Paecrentsos OE THE Horse-

Divisions: Public Matters before Midnight 1.57 .. 242 .. 187 .. 86 .. 179 after Midnight 46 .. 73 .. 47 .. 29 ,. 61 Private Bills, before Midnight 16 .. 14 .. 8 .. 12 .. 17 Total Number.of Divisions.... '219 .. 242 .. 127 .. 257 Sittings of the House:

Days of Sitting 121 .. 129 _ 120 .. 81 .. 160 Hours of Sitting 958.. 1104 .. 921 .. 617 .. 1193 „Number of Entries in each Day's Notes 7335 ..8571 —7917 _6301 .. 11,378

We have not before us the statistics of the present session ; but we know -well enough that the Committee of 1861 will exhibit largely aggravated forms of the abuses which are here illustrated. NO4V obviously mere " minor " improvement of rules will not enable the House to meet this increase of business, the less since we see a perpetual growth of speaking ambition and of idleness in action.

The witnesses from France-and from the United States did not told very materially to the suggestions adopted by the Committee of -1848. In both cases, the legislative bodies whose practice they reported had originally copied their rules from the English Parlia- ment, but with some material modifications. In the French Par- liament, as the reader is aware, much of the business was trans- acted in the bureaux, into which the general body of the Repre- sentative Chamber was divided. No restriction was imposed upon the length of speeches, either on the main question or on amend- ments; but, in 1814, a practice was adopted for the purpose of limiting debates, which had before been "protracted indefi- nitely."

''"The proceeding," says M. Guizot, "Is this. A Member, or two Mem- bers, call 'La clOture !' 'the President puts it to the vote' if any Member objects, he can speak against the clature ; one only can speak, and no reply is-allowed ; and then the President puts the question 'Must the 'debate be closed ? ' If a Member rises to speak against the clOtime, he is net allowed to opeak on the main question."

„Even under this practice' debates -hail lasted more than a fort- night; and M. Guizot considered that the rule had never been abused even during great party conflictain the chamber.

In the American House of Representatives, the practice is es-

.The figures within brackets show the number of Members in each Committee.

_Number of Committees.

Public [15) Election :5] Railway Bills 1.51 Private Graups [5] Other Private [5] 44 23 .14 17 112

Sittilos of C,ommitte:s.

Connoc:cial -Stunvand Coffee Navy, Army, and Ord. Miscellaneous Distrci. Planting. Expenditure. Expenditure.

Days.... 39 .39 40 87. '

Average number during 5 years ending

sentially different. The House consisted, at that day, of 22/3 Members.

" They sit round the Speaker in a half circle, seats rising as in an amphi- theatre; the vote is taken by each party rising in turn, but in ease of its being demanded, the 'ayes ' and 'noes' may be called. Members of the Executive Government have no seats in the house ; twenty-eight sitting committees are appointed at the coarmencement of a session, and all bills originate in these committees. No question of order is debated ; all suoh questions are decided by the Speaker ; and if his decision be appealed from to the House, it is decidedby vote but without debate."

In 1841, was adopted what is called "the One-hour Rule," which limits speeches to one hour. Mr. Curtis, in his evidence, and Mr. Winthrop, then Speaker of the House of Representa- tives, in a letter, declared that the rule had worked well. In addition to this rule, there is the process of what is called "the previous question," by which a debate could be brought to a olose. This differs from our proceeding of the same name : it consists of a motion in this form—" Shall the main question be now put?" If the question be answered in the affirmative, the debate ceases ; if in the negative, the debate proceeds. We find no lack of thoroughgoing suggestions at home ; but the Committees were too timid to go bravely into their work. In 1854, they debated much one amendment proposed by Mr. Speaker Lefevre, and adopted with a very slight change by Mr. Erskine May, that on the first reading of a Bill, the form of the question put by the Speaker should be "That the bill be read a first time," —omitting the word "now." We say " debated " because the mode of question to both witnesses was such as really to be con- troversial; Members seeming almost incapable of understanding the simple proposition before them. The object was, to separate the simple question, "that the bill be read -a first time," from any questions as to the time of taking the debate, should the House think it desirable to postpone the order of the day. Mr. May also made a variety of other suggestions which are "of the greatest importance," but again the House flinched from, adopting those which went most directly and completely to correct the grievances. Briefly put, his principal suggestions were these—That -unopposed bills should be introduced as a matter of course ; that certain questions of religion and trade should no longer of necessity he introduced in committee of the whole House ; that the form on the first reading of a bill should be, "That the bill be read a first time ; " that with regard to -a certain class of bills, about twenty in the session, the committee be dispensed with ; that a committee of the whole House, with a quorum-of 25, should sit in the morn- ing, probably twice a week, from noon till four, select committees sitting at the same time ; that the committee of the whole should. have power to introduce any amendment relevant to the subject matter of the bill ; and that members be permitted to deposit pe- titions with the clerk of the House.

Mr. May also made some suggestions -with -regard to Commit- tees of Supply and ()niers of the Day.; one in particular, -the abolition of debate on the order of the day, having been adopted. But it will be seen at a glance how completely the House of Cotn- mons, notwithstanding its omnipotence in the Legislation of this country, has flinched from adopting the suggestions made toit'by an Erskine May or a Shaw Lefevre. It has simply nibbled at the grand question, tinkering the minor details ; and-the consequence has been, that, although the improvements adopted, with very few exceptions, work well, any gain of time thus acquired has been more than compensated by the increase of business, by the enormous overgrowth of debate, and by a general laxity of system. The giant abuse is-one with which none of the amendments proposed by either Committee, or adopted by the House, has even professed to grapple. Unless the Committee of 1861 is to be as fruitless as its two predecessors,—unless it is to be nothing more than :a dealer in small wares, it must enter more deeply into the whole question, and must legislate in a much larger spirit, with a stronger consciousness of its duty and its power. But the acticin of the Committee of 1861 is too large a subject to be taken up as a postscript to a paper so long as the present. Our desire here has been to place before the reader, in one coup-d'oeil, the pre- sentments and propositions of the last two Committees and their witnesses, as furnishing some of the materials for the work of next session ; in our next number we shall consider that broader subject, always urging Members to take the two reports with them into the country, and to come back next year strong-for the work.