THE HOUSE OF COMMONS AND THE REPORTERS.

Grey River Argus, Volume VIII, Issue 590, 28 October 1869, Page 4

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS AND THE REPORTERS.

(From the Observei; August 1.) Seldom, if ever has there been such a session as that which is now drawing to a close, as the gallery reporters know to their sorrow. Moreover the older grows the session the harder grows the work,for what is mere talk for members is work for reporters, and hard work too. But even the patience of reporters has its limit, and the hon. members who would persist in sitting on Friday morning till half- past three o'clock reached that limit. The House began its sitting at 4 o'clock, 1 and on went the stream of talk nearly the clock round. At half-past two a.m., the Telegraphs Bill having just been disposed of, and one or two smaller matters, there remained on the orders of the day, the Public Works (Ireland) Bill, the Drainage and improvement of Land (Ireland) Bill, and the NitroGlycerine Bill — in committee. The prospect of going through committee on these interesting measures at 2.30 a.m. was more than the " victims," as the last " turns" in the gallery are called, could stand, and they — struck ! Such is the fact. These measures passed through committee, and the eloquence spent on them was not reported. Sir R. O'Brien — so it is said for in the absence of reporters all that we know is mere rumor — • actually called the attention of the Speaker of the House to the fact that the gallery was empty. It was, he pointed out almost a breach of privilege, inasmuch as the gentlemen of the press were the only link between hon. members and the world outside. To which the Speaker replied that the House of Commons did not pay the reporters, and, therefore, had no right or power to control their services. Thus it happened that the readers of yesterday's papers lost one hour's talk — nay, perhaps morr, for who knows how much more talk there might have been if the gallery had not been deserted I—and1 — and instead thereof they read in their morning's paper, " that the rest of the orders of the day were disposed of." The moral is perhaps obvious. It is only fair, however, to the reporters to say that there is another explanation of the reason given of their absence albeit we believe the above to be the true one. It is that an hon. member in talking about the Nitro-Glycerine Bill, enquired whether the qualities of that dangerous substance wei'e identical with those of dynamite — at the same time producing a specimen of the latter from his pocket, at the sight of which the 'gentlemen of the press, <vs a mere matter of pen onal safety, withdrew to a safe distance to avoid the possibility of a catastrophe uniinagiued since the days of Guy Faux.