The Washington times., 1901-09-29
'PARLIAMENT'S ODD RULES.
How the British Commons Pun
ishes Breaches Of Privileges.
The Honse wtelds an Autocratso
Authority Over All Subjects-Nu-
merous Cases Preceding That OF
the London GIobe-Odd Methods.

In democratic country where for
| every injury there is a legal remedy
there is something strange and incongr,-
Gus In the fact that the House of Com
moHs-the very body which personifies
\ the liberties OF the nation-can yet ~
| virtue of that mysterious power know
| as Parliamentary privilege WELD an au-
| tocratic authority uncontrolled by Law.
| Privilege took its rise in the absolute r.,-
cessity that the highest arthority In tie
| kingdom should have power to uphold iss
own dignity and independence; bu.
| though the need is obvious. yet the injus-
\ tice of the same body being at once ac-
| cuser and judge has led in the past G.
| many strange conflicts. in which. by (,
curious transformation. the House &.
Commons has appeared as the arbitrary
| oppressor. while its opponents have been
| sufferers in the cause of freedom.
Parliamentary annals furnish no more
curious example of this strange peryer-
sion of the accustomed order than the
case OF the 'Aylesbury Burgesses' in
l7o4. Ashley. a Burgess Of Aylesbury.
brought an action against the returning
officer for refusing his vote. and obtained
verdict; the Court of Queens Bench,
however. decided that an action did not
lie," as all matters relating to elections
were under the direct control of the House
of Commons; but on appeal this decision
was reversed by the Lords, to the great
indignation of the Commons. Five more
Burgesses then commenced action, and
were all committed to Newgate by the all
CRY Commons, while the Lords. maintain
ing their novel character as defenders of
the oppressed passed defiant resolution
that the rights and freedom of English
men ought not to be subject to arbitrary
votes of the House OF Commons. pro-
rogation put an end to the dispute. leav-
Ing the constitutional question unsettled
The reign of George III saw several in
tsresting struggles on questions Of privi-
lege, notably the conflict with the city
over the publication of the debates, IN
which the celebrated Wilkes played
prominent part. Two printers named
Thompson and Wheble were ordered to
attend at the bar of the House to answer
for the Misrepresentation of certain
speeches in their respective newspapers.
Neither. however. appeared The Inossen-
ger of the House went eight times IN owe
afternoon to Wheble's house, and each
time was told he had just stepped out, bl,t
was confidently expected back soon. 1t is
a curious fact that though the Houses
messenger may legally break open door
to arrest person he may not wait in the
house il the person is absent for the pur-
pose of arresting him on his return. This
point was finally settled in 1872. when hr.
Howard obtained damages agains. the
Sergeant-at-Arms or this very account.
The irritated Commons addressed the
King, who issued a proclamation for the
apprehension of the offenders, but in the
meantime Colonel Onslow made further
complaint against six more printers, who
We're accordingly all summoned to the
bar. The question was most fiercely de-
bated; the House sat till 5 In the morn
ing, and twenty-three divisions were ta-
ken. The difficulties in which the House
would be involved We're clearly pointed
out, Charles James Fox remarking: You
are like Glendoyer; you can call spirits
from the Vastly deep, but the question is.
Will the spirits come when you call
them?"
The spirits. indeed. proved very refrac-
tory. The messenger attempted to arrest
one of the printers. Miller, who promptly
gave him charge for assault. He was
brought before the Lord Mayor, Brass
Crosby. and Aldermen Wilkes and Oliver.
and committed 20 prison on the ground
that he was not a peace officer, and that
the warrant was not backed by a city
magistrate. The Lord Mayor, being or
dered to attend in his place in the House
to answer for his violation of privilege,
was accompanied there by an enthusiast
tic crowd, who hailed him as the guard
ian of the city's rights and the nations
liberties After days Of debate. both the
Mayor and Alderman Oliver were COM
mitted to the Tower. Wilkes, the prime
mover in the mischief, was summoned to
appear at the bar on Aug ust s, but the
Ministers, with more discretion than val
or, adjourned the House till the 9Th. The
Mayor was only released by the proroga-
ton, when the whole Common Counci
went in procession OF carriages to the
Tower and fetched him away in triumph,
while salutes were fired by the City Ar
tllery Company and at night all London
was illuminated.
Among the striking cases of privilege in
more recent times, that of Sir Francis
Burdett. who referred to the House as IA
part of our fellow-subjects collected to-
gether by means which it is not necessary
to describe aroused the greatest excite
ment. Sir Francis barricaded himself in
his house against the Sergeant-at-Arms.
who only forced his way in after a three
days siege. with the assistance of the
military. and discovered Sir Francis, with
a truly dramatic sense of the situation.
teaching his little boy the provisions OF
Magma Charta. Sir Francis was commit
ted to the Tower, and, though he brought
actions against the Speaker and the Ser
geant-at-Arms, the courts decided in IA
vor of the House of Commons.
conflict between the House and the
courts, however, arose in 1887, when
Stockdale brought an action for libel
against Hansard. who pleaded the order
of the House in defence. The court re-
jected the plea, whereon Stockdale was
ordered by the Commons into custody.
and on his bringing fresh action against
Hansard. was sent, with his attorney, to
Newgate, where he solaced his imprison-
ment by bringing yet another action. The
Commons did not proceed to commit the
judges of the Court of Queens Bench to
prison. though they could have found Il
precedent for doing so in the Stuart
times. and the matter was settled by the
passing of an act of Parliament to meet
the difficulty.
The last case of privilege in which Of
tenders have been summoned to the bar
of the House occurred in 1892, when the
directors and manager of the Cambrian
Railway were ordered 10 attend. and were
solemnly admonshed by the Speaker for
their action in dismissing one Of their
servants, John Hood, for giving evidence
before the Select Committee on the hours
of railway servants.
In old days offenders at the bar were
compelled to receive sentence on their
knees. but in l15i Mr.. Alexander Murray
obstinately refused To adopt this huIailiat-
ing posture. and though he was sent to