at the opening of the new Parliament on February 11, 1919,
" the end of the struggle between German tyranny and
European freedom " and " the dawn of a new era." The
Speech was of unprecedented length, as well as of historic
importance. One of its most striking passages was this :
To build a better Britain we must stop at no sacrifice of interest
or prejudice to stamp out unmerited poverty, to diminish unemploy-
ment and mitigate its sufferings, to provide decent homes, to improve
the nation's health, and to raise the standard of well-being throughout
the community.
Never before was the question of the condition of the
people enlarged upon so emphatically and boldly in the
Speech from the Throne. His Majesty added the warning :
We shall not achieve this end by undue tenderness towards acknow-
ledged abuses, and it must necessarily be retarded by violence and
even by disturbance,
216 THE PAGEANT OF PARLIAMENT
For many years the Commons went to the House of
Lords in a way that was most unseemly in answer to the
message of Black Rod, to hear the Speech from the Throne
read by the Sovereign. So great was the rush and crush
at one of the earher openings of Parhament by Queen Victoria,
that Joseph Hume, as he bitterly complained in the House
of Commons, neither saw her Majesty nor heard her voice,
although he was within touch of the Speaker as he stood
at the Bar. " I was crushed into a corner," he said, " my
head being knocked against a post, and I might have been
much injured if a stout Member had not come to my assist-
ance." Dickens, who was present at the ceremony a few
years later, said the Speaker was like a schoolmaster with
a mob of unmannerly boys at his heels. " He is propelled,"
the novelist wrote, " to the Bar of the House with the frantic
fear of being knocked doAvn and trampled upon by the rush
of M.P.'s." In 1851 the Speaker was so pushed and hustled
that his wig was knocked awry and his robe torn. Frank
Hugh O'Donnell relates in his book on The Irish Parlia-
mentary Party how at one opening of Parliament in the
later 'seventies he saved Disraeli from being knocked down
by squaring his shoulders and elbows to keep off the pressure
of the mob of M.P.'s from the frail person of the Prime
Minister. Disraeli sent his secretary, Montagu Cory, to
thank O'Donnell. The last time such a scene was enacted
was in 1901, at the first opening of Parliament by King
Edward. Since 1902 the Strangers' Gallery of the House of
Lords has been set apart for Members of the House of
Commons, and they are allowed access to it before the
King appears in the Chamber and Black Rod is sent
to command the attendance of the Commons at the Bar.
It is a spectacle well worth seeing — the King crowned and in
his purple robes and standing on the Throne, surrounded by
his Ministers, addressing the assembled Lords and Commons.
It is the most noble and impressive sight to be seen at
Westminster.
The Speech is read in both Houses — in the Lords by
the Lord Chancellor, in the Commons by the Speaker — when
THE SPEECH FROM THE THRONE 217
they reassemble after the ceremony of the opening of Parlia-
ment by the King. But before this is done each House gives
a first reading to a Bill, in obedience to a Standing Order
in the Lords, and in the Commons by ancient custom. The
incident escapes the attention of most Lords and Commons,
so unostentatiously is it done, and probably its constitutional
significance is lost to most of those who may chance to notice
it. In the Lords the Bill is called " Select Vestries Bill,"
and in the Commons the " Bill for the more effectual Pre-
venting of Clandestine Outlawries." It may seem a matter
of form, the procedure being that the Clerk in each House
simply reads the title of his Bill, but it is meant to assert
the right of Parliament to act as it thinks fit, without reference
to any outside authority, to debate matters other than " the
causes of summons " set forth in the Speech from the Throne.
Neither of these Bills is ever heard of again during the
session. The Outlawries Bill, which does service in the
House of Commons, has been preserved in the drawers of
the Table since the opening of the present Chamber in 1852.
For one moment, at the opening of each session, it is produced
by the Clerk, and is seen no more for another twelve months.
CHAPTER XVIII
DEBATE ON THE ADDRESS TO THE KING
The Commons hear the Speech from the Throne twice —
by the Sovereign in the House of Lords and again at its
subsequent recital in their own Chamber by the Speaker.
Macaulay states in his History that the first Speech of
James II to ParHament in 1685 — notable for its extra-
ordinary admonition to the Commons, that if they wished to
meet frequently they must treat him generously in the matter
of supplies — was greeted with loud cheers by the Tory
Members assembled at the Bar of the House of Lords.
" Such acclamations were then usual," says the historian.
" It has now been during many years the grave and decorous
usage of Parliaments to hear in respectful silence all expres-
sions, acceptable or unacceptable, which are uttered from
the Throne." The recital of the King's Speech by Mr.
Speaker to the House of Commons was unmarked by any
demonstration of Party feeling for two centuries and a
quarter. But at the opening of the last session of the Balfour
Parliament, in February 1905, there was a breach of the
traditional decorum, which, as a change in parliamentary
manners, is noteworthy enough to be placed on record./ The
promise in the Speech of economy, " so far as the circum-
stances of the case admitted," was received with derisive
laughter on the Opposition benches, while the mention of the
" prospect " of a promised Redistribution Bill, by which
Ireland was to lose twenty-two seats, provoked loud and
angry cries of defiance from the Irish Members. Since then
the reading of the Speech by the Speaker in the Commons,
whether at the opening of a new Parliament or a new session,
218
DEBATE ON THE ADDRESS 219
is usually greeted with Ministerial shouts of approbation
or Opposition cries of dissent. These Party cheers constitute
a complete acknowledgment that the King's Speech is the
speech, not of the King, but of his Ministers.
In each House a motion for an Address to the King for
his " most gracious Speech " is submitted on behalf of the
Government. The proposer and seconder of the Address
in each House are in uniform or full dress. This is the only
occasion, be it noted, when a Member, whether of the Peerage
or of the Commons, is permitted to appear in Parliament
otherwise than in civilian clothes, a rule which, probably
in the history of Parliament, was suspended only during the
Great War, when many Members wore khaki. The uniforms
of the Militia or Yeomanry are much affected, and, failing
the commission to wear them, Court costume or levee dress
is the rule. Another order, which prohibits Members of
either House from " carrying a lethal weapon," is also sus-
pended for the occasion in favour of the sword of the soldier
or courtier. There is, however, one instance of the Address
having been seconded by a Member who wore no costume
of ceremony. That was when Charles Fenwick, the Labour
representative, who at the opening of the first session of
the Liberal Parliament of 1893-95 discharged that function
in his ordinary everyday clothes.
In March 1894 the same Liberal Administration being
in olTice — save that Lord Rosebery had succeeded Gladstone
as Premier — an amendment to the Address moved by
LaBouchere, Member for Northampton, hostile to the
House -of Lords, was carried against the Government by the
narrow majority of two — 147 votes to 145. It declared
" that the power now enjoyed by persons not elected to
Parliament by the possessors of the parliamentary franchise
to prevent Bills being submitted to your Majesty for your
Royal approval shall cease," and expressed the hope that
" if it be necessary your Majesty will, with and by the advice
of your responsible Ministers, use the powers vested in your
Majesty to secure the passing of this much-needed reform."
220 THE PAGEANT OF PARLIAMENT
The method suggested by Labouchere was the creation of
500 peers who would be willing to carry through the House
of Lords a Bill for the abolition of that Chamber and them-
selves. Sir William Harcourt, Chancellor of the Exchequer
and Leader of the House of Commons, declined to treat the
reverse as a vote of censure, or to add the amendment to
the Address. " The Address in answer to the Speech from
the Throne," said he, " is a proceeding for which her Majesty's
Government make themselves responsible — responsible as
the representatives of the majority in the House of Commons
from whom that Address proceeds. I think that is a clear
constitutional principle which nobody will be disposed to
dispute. The Government could not present to the Sovereign
in a formal manner a document of which they are not prepared
to accept the entire and immediate responsibility." He
concluded by inviting the House to negative the amended
Address, and to adopt a new Address, which simply assured
her Majesty " that the measures recommended to our con-
sideration shall receive our most careful attention." This
motion was seconded by John Morley.
The fact that neither of these Ministers wore Court dress
or uniform led that humourist, Colonel Saunderson, Member
for North Armagh, to indulge in a characteristic joke. Rising
to a point of order, he asked the Speaker whether it was not
contrary to the immemorial practice of the House for the
mover of the Address to appear without the uniform befitting
his rank ? If, he continued, the Speaker should answer
that question in the affirmative, he would move the adjourn-
ment of the House for twenty minutes, so as to give the
Chancellor of the Exchequer an opportunity of arraying
himself in garments suitable to the occasion. The Speaker
took no notice of the question, for, of course, it was not
seriously intended. What Colonel Saunderson wanted was
a laugh, and that he got in the fullest measure. The incident,
unprecedented in parliamentary history, ended with the
unanimous adoption of the new Address.
Another strange thing happened in relation to the Speech
from the Throne at the opening of a new session on February
12, 1918. I was in the Reporters' Gallery of the House
of Lords when the Lord Chancellor read the Speech at the
DEBATE ON THE ADDRESS 221
reassembling of the House after the opening ceremony by
the King. As he was reading the document, Lord Curzon,
Leader of the House, handed him a sHp of paper. The
Lord Chancellor then said that the following passage had
been accidentally omitted from the printed copy of the
King's Speech, which was supplied to him and distributed to
their lordships :
I have summoned representatives of my Dominions and of my
Indian Empire to a further session of the Imperial War Cabinet in
order that I may again receive their advice on questions of moment
affecting the common interests of the Empire.
It had also been omitted, by some oversight, from the
copy of the Speech given by the Lord Chancellor to the
King to read from the Throne. Attention was called to
the matter in the House of Commons. The Member for
Carlisle, Mr. Denman, pointed out that this paragraph was
to be found in the Lords' record of the King's Speech, but
not in the record of the King's Speech printed in the Votes
and Proceedings of the Commons. He thought it desirable
that the records of both Houses as to what was actually
contained in the King's Speech should be identical. The
Speaker, Mr. Lowther, said the hon. Member seemed to
want him to put into the mouth of the King words which
his Majesty did not use — a remark that was received with
laughter. He explained that the copy of the Speech which
he had read to the Commons had been supplied to him by
the Home Secretary, and he assumed it to be accurate.
It was brought to his notice afterwards that the copy of the
Speech which he had read did not correspond with the copy
which had been read by the King, and therefore he caused
the official record to be amended so as to correspond exactly
with the actual Speech which his Majesty had read from
the Throne.
It is a compliment to be invited to move or second the
motion for the Address in reply to the Speech. Young
Ministeriahsts of promise in the House of Commons are gene-
rally selected for the distinction. As a rule, one represents
222 THE PAGEANT OF PARLIAMENT
an urban and the other a rural constituency ; one is associated
with agriculture and the other with trade. The debate
which follows is always of interest, and usually is a good
test of the debating quality of the House. The Opposition
give battle to the Ministerialists. The policy of the Govern-
ment is attacked along the whole line in a series of amend-
ments to the Address.
In former times the Address — as I have already men-
tioned — used to be an elaborate answer to the Speech,
paragraph by paragraph, expressing approval of its every
declaration, and thanking the Sovereign in each instance for
the great condescension and wisdom of his words. This
practice was abandoned owing to the waste of time it involved,
and for many years the Address has assumed a more simple
and rational form. From the Commons it consists of a
simple resolution in the following terms :
That a humble Address be presented to his Majesty, as foUoweth :
Most Gracious Sovereign, — We, your Majesty's most dutiful and
loyal subjects, the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Ireland in Parliament assembled, beg leave to thank your Majesty
for the most gracious Speech which your Majesty has addressed to
both Houses of Parliament.
The Addresses from the Lords and Commons, in reply to
the Speech, were at one time presented to the Sovereign at
Buckingham Palace, nominally by " the whole House " in each
case, but really by the Lord Chancellor for the Lords and by
the Speaker for the Commons, each being attended by the pro-
poser and seconder and a few of the Ministers in either House.
All the Members of each House, however, were supposed to
have the privilege of " free access " to the Throne on these
occasions ; and, moreover, they might, if they so pleased,
enter the presence of the Sovereign in ordinary attire, instead
of in the regulation gold-braided coat and knee-breeches.
The ceremony of presenting the Address by the whole House
is now obsolete. The course which has been followed in
recent years is that the Addresses are presented by two
Ministers who are members of the Royal Household. These
Ministers also bring back to both Houses the King's acknow-
ledgment of the Addresses.
DEBATE ON THE ADDRESS 223
A message from the Crown, or, as it is styled officially,
*' a message under the Royal sign-manual," is presented to
both Houses with some ceremony. In the Lords, the Lord
Steward of the Household, wearing his official uniform, holding
a white wand in one hand and a roll of parchment in the
other, rises in his place at an opportune moment and announces
that he has a message from the King. He then hands his
roll of parchment to the Lord Chancellor, who reads it
to the House. In the Commons the incident is perhaps
a little more picturesque. The Comptroller of the House-
hold appears at the Bar unannounced. Unlike the incursions
of " Black Rod " from the House of Lords, who is always
heralded by the loud cry of the doorkeeper, and must knock
at the door to obtain admittance, the Royal Messenger who
brings the King's acknowledgment of the Address has free
entry to the House. He comes in. without fuss or noise,
and, his duty discharged, is allowed to depart silently and in
peace. Standing at the Bar, in his dark uniform relieved
by a liberal display of gold braid and gilt buttons, and
carrying his long white wand, he announces to the House —
the Speaker standing and the Members uncovering while
the Message from the King is being delivered — that he
brings his Majesty's most grateful thanks for the Address
from his faithful Commons. Then advancing to the Table,
he hands the document to the Clerk, and it is passed on to
the Speaker, by whom it is read to the House. The Comp-
troller of the Royal Household retires, stepping backwards,
bowing to the Chair, until the Bar is reached, when, turning
round, he disappears through the swing-doors. But this
happens a week or more after the Address has been adopted,
and the work of Parliament has begun in real earnest.
CHAPTER XIX
THE SERJEANT-AT-ARMS
" Order, order ! " These are the words that are most
frequently heard in the House of Commons. They run like
a refrain, appealing, warning, and, at times, even menacing,
through the babble and confusion of the Party conflict.
" Order, order ! " Members shout at each other with bitter-
ness and defiance across the floor. " Order, order ! " cries
Mr. Speaker, when he observes any breach of decorum
or rises to intervene in an altercation.
A conspicuous object in the House of Commons is a
large armchair of heavy oak, upholstered in dark green
leather, at the Bar, raised a few feet above the level of the
floor, just inside the swing-doors of the main entrance to
the Chamber. It is the Serjeant-at-Arms' chair. The Ser-
jeant-at-Arms is the chief executive officer of the House of
Commons. He it is who is charged with the duty of pre-
serving decorum in the Chamber and its precincts, of execut-
ing the warrants of the House against persons it has adjudged
guilty of breaches of its privileges or contempt of its dignity ;
and it is he who backs with force, when force is necessary,
the " Order, order ! " of Mr. Speaker. He sits in his chair,
facing the Speaker, picturesquely clad in a black cut-away
coat, open at the breast to show the daintiest of ruffles in the
whitest of cambric (of which fops in the times of the Georges
were so fond), knee-breeches, black silk stockings, and shoes
with silver buckles ; and, as the symbol of the power and
authority of his office, a rapier in its scabbard is girt to his
side. His voice is very rarely heard in the House. It is
seldom necessary for the Speaker to give him an order in
THE SERJEANT-AT-ARMS 225
words, and a reply or explanation from him is scarcely ever
needed.
The Serjeant-at-Arms is appointed by the King person-
ally. An officer of his Majesty's Forces — alternately soldier
and sailor — usually gets the position. He is styled " Serjeant-
at-Arms in Ordinary to his Majesty," and his duty is, as
described in the patent of his appointment, " to attend upon
his Majesty when there is no Parliament, and for the time
of every Parliament to attend upon the Speaker of the
House of Commons." He has a salary of £1,200 and an
official residence in the Palace of Westminster. The Deputy
Serjeant-at-Arms, who, wearing the same official dress as the
Serjeant-at-Arms, takes turns at sitting on guard in the
big chair at the Bar, has a salary of £800 a year, and also
lives in the Palace rent free. There is also an assistant
Serjeant-at-Arms, who usually attends to the administrative
work of the office outside the Chamber. He has £500 a
year and £150 as an allowance for a house. The de-
partment of the Serjeant-at-Arms costs about £14,000 a
year, for, in addition to his deputy and assistant,
there are also two door-keepers and eighteen messengers
(recognized by their brass chains and badges of Mercury),
who are his first reserves in the maintenance of order in
the House.
It is not alone to " strangers " who have offended the
dignity and majesty of the House of Commons that the
Serjeant-at-Arms is an awe-inspiring personage. Even
the representatives of the people may have occasion to
shiver at the dread touch of his hand on their shoulder.
Of the large number of new Members returned at a General
Election few are probably aware of the fact (which, indeed,
is not generally known even to old Members) that the Clock
Tower contains a suite of rooms for the confinement of repre-
sentatives who may be pronounced guilty by the House
of some serious breach of its privileges or some outrage on
its decorum. A Member of Parliament arrested on the
warrant of the Speaker was formerly sent, like strangers
guilty of breaches of privilege, to Newgate or to the Tower.
But in the building of the Palace of Westminster prison
accommodation was specially provided for Members and
VOL. I. 15
226 THE PAGEANT OF PARLIAMENT
strangers committed by the House to the custody of the
Serjeant-at-Arms.
The prison of the House of Commons is not, however,
a dungeon vile, deep down below the vaults of the Palace,
a dark and slimy place into which the light of day never
enters. It is situated about half-way up the Clock Tower,
and under the home of that popular London celebrity. Big
Ben, probably the best known clock in the whole world.
There are two suites of apartments, each consisting of two
bedrooms — one for the prisoner and the other for one
of the Serjeant-at-Arms' messengers, who acts as gaoler —
and a sitting-room. There is, therefore, accommodation
for two prisoners and two gaolers in the Clock Tower, which
so far has been found more than sufficient.
Access to these rooms is obtained only through the resi-
dence of the Serjeant-at-Arms, who is responsible for the
safe keeping of a prisoner of Parliament. Their windows
command a view of the Thames and Westminster Bridge
on one side and of Palace Yard on the other. Imprisonment
under any conditions is, perhaps, an undesirable position,
but it must be said that in the Clock Tower it is deprived of
all its terrors and most of its inconveniences. The prisoner
may rise when he pleases ; his meals are supplied from the
catering department of the House of Commons, and he can
have what he likes — at his own expense. After breakfast
he is allowed an hour's recreation on the terrace, accompanied
by his gaoler and a police-officer in plain clothes, and he may
take the air also in the evening. Should his term of imprison-
ment extend over Sunday, he may attend service in St.
John's Church, close to the Palace of Westminster, to which
he is accompanied by his guards.
The practice of the House of Commons, in recent times,
was to commit a person guilty of any violation of its privi-
leges to the custody of the Serjeant-at-Arms, to be detained
during its pleasure. The imprisonment generally continued
until the prisoner expressed contrition for his offence, or
the House in its mercy resolved that he be discharged. But
before he was free to go he had to pay a substantial fee to
the Serjeant-at-Arms for locking him up and seeing that he
did not escape. The House, however, has no power to keep
THE SERJEANT-AT-ARMS 227
a person in custody during its recess. If, therefore, the
confinement should last until the prorogation of Parliament,
he may not only claim his release but decline to make
good the Serjeant-at-Arms' bill of costs. The last occupant
of the prison was Charles Bradlaugh, the Member for North-
ampton. His confinement for twenty-four hours, in 1880,
was an episode in his long contest with the House of Commons
over his claim to be allowed, as an atheist, to take his seat
without having to use, in the oath of allegiance, the ex-
pression, " So help me, God ! " Bradlaugh, in a con-
versation about his prison experiences, stated that while the
rooms were comfortable, and the confinement by no means
irksome, the noisy passage of time as recorded by Big Ben
in booming the quarters and the hours at night allowed
him but little sleep.
Contumacy on the part of a Member nowadays would
hardly be visited by imprisonment. Among the expressions
which are considered out of order are treasonable or seditious
words, the use of the Sovereign's name offensively, or, with
a view to influence debate, disparaging references to the
character and proceedings of Parliament, personal attacks
on Members, allusions to matters pending judicial decision
in the courts of law, and insulting reflections on Judges or;..;>^<
other persons in high authority. The Speaker, or the""*
Chairman of Committees, has also the power, after having
called attention three times to the conduct of a Member
who persists in irrelevance, or in tedious repetition, to direct
him to discontinue his speech. If a Member's conduct is
grossly disorderly, or if he refuses to apologize for an unparlia-
mentary expression, the Speaker or Chairman orders him
to withdraw immediately from the House and its precincts