debate is resumed at the point at which it was interrupted. In the House of Commons, another interruption was sometimes caused by moving that candles be brought in ; but, by a standing order of the 6th February, 1717, it was ordered,

"That when the house, or any committee of the whole house, shall be sitting, and daylight be shut in, the serjeant-at-arms attending this house do take care that candles be brought in without any particular order for that purpose."

questions.

If a question be complicated, the house may order it to Complicated be divided, so that each part may be determined separately.2 A right has been claimed, in both houses, for an individual member to insist upon the division of a complicated question; but it has not been recognized, nor can it be reasonable to allow it, because, 1st, the house might not think the question complicated; and, 2dly, the member objecting to its complexity, may move its separation by amendments. But, as the house can order a question to be divided, it may be moved for that purpose, and it is difficult to state an objection to such a proceeding, although the ordinary practice has been to resort to amendments, instead of attempting the dissection of a question in another form. On the 29th January, 1722, a protest was entered on the Journals of the lords, in which it was alleged "to be contrary to the nature and course of proceedings in Parliament, that a complicated question, consisting of matters of a different consideration, should be put, especially if objected to, that lords may not be deprived of the liberty of giving their judgments on the said different matters, as they think fit."3

When all preliminary debates and objections to a ques- Question put. tion are disposed of, the question must next be put, which is done in the following manner. The speaker, if necessary, takes a written or printed copy of the question, and

118 Com. J. 718.

22 Ib. 43. 32 Ib. 710.

322 Lords' J. 73. See also 24 Ib. 466, 467. 4 Timberland's Debates of the Lords, 392. 32 Com. J. 710.

N

Questions again stated.

states or reads it to the house, at length, beginning with "The question is, that." This form of putting the question is always observed, and precedes every vote of the house, however insignificant.

In the lords, when the question has been put, the speaker says, "As many as are of that opinion say 'content,'" and "as many as are of a contrary opinion say 'not content;"" and the respective parties exclaim “ content" or "not content," according to their opinions. In the commons, the speaker takes the sense of the house by desiring that" as many as are of that opinion say 'aye,' and " as many as are of the contrary opinion say 'no." On account of these forms, the two parties are distinguished in the lords as "contents" and "not contents,' and in the commons as the "ayes" and "noes." When each party have exclaimed according to their opinion, the speaker endeavours to judge, from the loudness and general character of the opposing exclamations, which party have the majority. As his judgment is not final, he expresses his opinion thus: "I think the ('contents' or) 'ayes' have it;" or, "I think the ('not contents' or) 'noes' have it." If the house acquiesce in this decision, the question is said to be "resolved in the affirmative" or

negative," according to the supposed majority on either side; but if the party thus declared to be the minority, dispute the fact, they say "no; the 'contents' (or 'not contents') the 'ayes' (or 'noes') have it :" and the actual numbers must be counted, by means of what is called a division.2

The question is stated distinctly by the speaker; but, in case it should not be heard, it will be stated again.

1 The form of putting the question and taking the vote was very similar in the Roman senate. The consul who presided there was accustomed to say, "Qui hæc sentitis in hanc partem; qui alia omnia, in eam partem, ite, quâ sentitis."-Plinii Epistolæ, lib. viii. ep. 14.

2 See Chapter XII.

On the 15th April 1825, notice was taken that several members had not heard the question put, and the speaker desired any such members to signify the same; which being done, the question was again stated to them, and they declared themselves with the noes.'

It must be well understood by members that their Voices on the opinion is to be collected from their voices in the house, question. and not by a division; and if their voices and their votes should be at variance, the former will be held more binding than the latter.

On the report of the Holyrood Park Bill, August 10th, 1843, a member called out with the noes, "the noes have it,” and thus forced that party to a division, although he was about to vote with the "ayes," and went out into the lobby with them. On his return, and before the numbers were declared by the tellers, Mr. Brotherton addressed the speaker, sitting and covered (the doors being closed), and claimed that the member's vote should be reckoned with the noes. The speaker put it to the member, whether he had said, "the noes have it;" to which he replied that he had, but without any intention of voting with the noes. The speaker, however, would not admit of his excuse; but ordered that his vote should be counted with the " noes," as he had declared himself with them in the house."

180 Com. J. 307.

2 There is no entry of this proceeding in the Votes; but Mr. Brotherton, at the time, kindly supplied this precedent.

Object and principle of an amendment.

Various modes of amendment.

CHAPTER IX.

AMENDMENTS TO QUESTIONS; AND AMENDMENTS TO PRO-
POSED AMENDMENTS.

THE object of an amendment is to effect such an alteration in a question as will enable certain members to vote in favour of it, who, without such alteration, must either have voted against it, or have abstained from voting. Without the power of amending a question, an assembly would have no means of expressing their opinions with consistency: they must either affirm a whole question, to parts of which they entertain objections, or negative a whole question, to parts of which they assent. In both cases a contradiction would ensue, if they afterwards expressed their true judgment in another form. In the first case supposed, they must deny what they had before affirmed; and in the second, they must affirm what they had before denied. Even if the last decision were binding, both opinions would have been voted, and probably entered in their minutes, and the contradiction would be manifest. The confusion which must arise from any irregularity in the mode of putting amendments; is often exemplified at public meetings where fixed principles and rules are not observed; and it would be well for persons in the habit of presiding at meetings of any description, to make themselves familiar with the rules of Parliament, in regard to questions and amendments; which have been tested by long experience, and are found as simple and efficient in practice, as they are logical in principle.

An amendment may be made to a question, 1, by leaving out certain words; 2, by leaving out certain words in order to insert or add others; 3, by inserting or adding certain words. The proper time for moving an amend

ment is after a question has been proposed by the speaker, and before it has been put. The order and form in which the points arising out of amendments are determined, are as follow:

words.

1. When the proposed amendment is, to leave out To leave out certain words, the speaker first states the question, but instead of putting it, he adds "Since which it has been proposed, by way of amendment, to leave out the words," proposed to be omitted. He then puts the question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the question." If that question be resolved in the affirmative, it shows that the house prefer the original question to the amendment, and the question, as first proposed, is put by the speaker. If, however, the question "That the words stand part of the question," be negatived, the question is put, with the omission of those words; unless another amendment be then moved, for the addition of other words.

words, and to insert or add others.

2. When the proposed amendment is to leave out certain To leave out words in order to insert or add others, the proceeding commences in the same manner as the last. If the house resolve "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the question," the original question is put; but if they resolve that such words shall not stand part of the question, by negativing that proposition when put; the next question proposed is, that the words proposed to be substituted, be inserted or added instead thereof. This latter question being resolved in the affirmative, the main question, so amended, is put.

words.

3. In the case of an amendment to insert or add words, To insert or add the proceeding is more simple. The question is merely put, that the proposed words "be there inserted" or "added;" if it be carried, the words are inserted or added accordingly, and the main question, so amended, is put; and if negatived, the question is put as it originally stood.