A question of order arose on Thursday last, which, in our opinion, was too serious to be treated, as it was, as one of party significance. This, we take leave to think, was a blunder. Tho point raised was one which should not have been deemed a party one ; and we have this further to say, that a Ministry that is too apt to raise Government questions on mere trifles manifests weakness. The question came about in this way. Tho House was sitting in committee on the Abolition Bill. Just before half-past two the Sergeant-at-arms came in and took away the mace. At such conduct there were vigorous protests, and just as Mr. Bunny was demanding its return, the Sergeant-at-arms announced the Speaker. On this being done, Mr. O’Rorkb vacated the chair, prayers wero read, the journals signed, and then Mr. Stout rose to a question of privilege. Before he could, however, state what tho question was, tho Speaker said ho understood that tho committee’s labors wero not ended, and that therefore the House must go into committee. Mr, O’Robke, thereupon, resumed his position as Chairman, and points of order were raised by Mr. Sheehan, Mr. Bonny, and others. Two questions were really put: First, whether tho Speaker had any right to como in, preceded by the mace, and take the chair ; second, if he had that right, must he not go through the order paper with the usual business 2 Mr. O’Rorice ruled that the committee was properly constituted, and then an effort was made to got the question referred to the House. Mr. Stafford approved of this being done, but it was opposed. Just as tho division was being taken however, tho word was apparently passed round to the effect that it was a Government question. The consequence was that the question of order was never remitted to the House, and at present it is difficult to say what
the decision may be. Unfortunately the Government, instead of looking at the point as a difficult one—as one affecting the whole course of the business of. the House, and one which might be a dangerous precedent—treated it as a party question. This, as we have already said, was an inexcusable blunder. There are enough of party questions without creating more. It seems to us that as the committee was sitting, and as the Speaker, as Mr. Sheehan very properly showed, was bound to know what was being done in the House, the Speaker had no right to come and take the chair. Ho can only take the chair in some particular cases. These are—First, if any sudden disorder arises; second, if the time for holding a conference with the Legislative Council has arrived ; third, if a message be brought to attend the Governor or the Commissioners in the Council Chamber ; fourth, if there is not a quorum present ; fifth, if the Chairman has a report to make. Now, none of these cases had occurred, and we cannot conceive why the Speaker should have come in and taken the chair. Mr. O’Rorke might, we think, have properly assumed that the Speaker had been guilty of an irregularity, and that ho was therefore Chairman, and had not ceased to bo such even though there were cries of ‘ ‘ Mr. “ Speaker,” the production of the mace, and the reading of prayers. But it is, we think, equally clear, if the Speaker was not guilty of an irregularity, then that there was no power for him to at once vacate the chair. There was no report from the committee, with leave to sit again. The committee’s functions were at an end. Tlie business had lapsed, or been determined by the House resuming, and until the Abolition Bill became inserted in the order paper again, the Speaker could not leave the chair for the purpose of allowing the Chairman to proceed with the Abolition Bill. Besides, there was business in the paper preceding the orders of the day, and when the Speaker was in the chair he had no power to decide that the business should be taken in an order different from that in which it appeared in the paper. The Speaker has intimated that he intends not to be guided by the precedent of the Assembly of New South Wales; —we are not aware of any other exactly in point ; —and we trust the Ministry will not allow the House to fall into the disorder it fell into on Thursday. It is the duty of the Ministry to guide the House, and not allow it to drift into such disorder as happened on that occasion. We await the decision that will yet be given, and we trust that no party feeling will be allowed to interfere in deciding this great question of conducting Parliamentary business.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZTIM18750914.2.10
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4519, 14 September 1875, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
802Untitled New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4519, 14 September 1875, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.