The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-03-08
Recalcitrant Members May Now he
Suspended for the Session In
stead of N Few Days.
EXCITING ALL-NIGHT DEBATE
ALL ATTEMPTS TO AMEND THE PRO-
POSED RULE DEFEATED.
Roll Called at $40 O'Clock This Morn
ing and the Proposition Adopted
by Vote of 264 to 81.

LONDON. March s. $50 a. m.-The House
of Commons adjourned at $40 o'clock this
morning after an exciting all-night session,
and after adopting Mr. Balfours amend
ment to the rules whereby recalcitrant
members may be suspended for the remain
der of the session. The vote was 26i TO 81
in favor of the amendment. The new rule
is aimed at Irish members, who raised
disturbance on Tuesday night and were
carried out of the chamber.
In anticipation of a lively debate and ex-
citing scenes. there was large attendance.
The visitors galleries were filled, many
peers and ladies being among those present.
Though no extra policemen were visible. a
large force of police was in readiness with
in easy reach.
The speaker, Mr. Gully, announced that
he had received letter from Mr. Jordan
to the effect that he had not defed the
authority of the chair and on the motion
of Mr.. Dillon Mr.. Jordan's name was re-
moved from the list of suspended members
Mr.. Balfour then moved his amendment
to the rule governing the suspension of re-
calcitrant members. In supporting the mo-
tion Mr.. Balfour said il was necessary, to
provide adequate summary punishment for
speaker 3
orders as occurred on Tuesday. He trusted
the House would agree unanimously 10 the
amendment. The House ought not to re-
main helpless against a member who COM
mitted such an aggravated crime against
the House, an offense the danger and
reality of which had been so painfully
brought before them.
Sir Henry Campbell alluded
to the grossly disorderly conduct of certain
members, and said he had not a word of
excuse to say in their Justification or pal
liation, but he suggested a modification of
Mr.. Balfour's amendment.
Mr.. John Redmond said that what had
occurred was a natural ebullition of feeling
against an unjust closure. He denied pre-
meditation, and said the moral responsible
ity for what had occurred was wholly on
Mr.. Balfour, whose proposal now was ex-
travagant and unnecessary.
Lord Hugh Cecil, Conservative, moved an
amendment providing that recalcitrant
members should be imprisoned. This was
opposed by Mr.. Balfour, who pointed out
that 1t would place too much responsibility
on the government Lord Hugh Cecil
wished to withdraw the amendment. but
the Irish members insisted on continuing
the discussion of ii.
Several passionate speeches were made
and the scene was one of great excitement
Finally. having forced a division by shout
ing AYE" when the speaker put the ques-
tion, the Irish members Joined the rest Of
the House in the mo" lobby. the result be-
ing that one voted for the amendment
of Lord Cecil and 1926 voted against it. An
incident which had raised much bad blood
ended amid peals of laughter
Several Intellectual attempts were then
made 10 adjourn the debate. Mr.. Balfour
appealed 10 the House 10 arrive at deci-
sion before adjournment and the debate
went on. AT 4:30 a. m. he moved a closure
on a motion for adjournment. but the mo-
ton was rejected by 23l 10 ll9 votes and the
debate was resumed.
Under closure an amendment by Mr.. La
bouchere TO make the term of suspension
two months. was rejected by vote of 22l
to 81.
Mr. Balfour moved that the main question
be put This was followed by cheers and
uproar. mingled with Irish cries OF Gag
The speaker then read the new rule and the
House divided. The new rule was adopt
ed-2si to 81. The House adjourned at
$40 =. m.