PRACTICES. from pressing too hardly on candidates and others, ILLEGAL sections 22, 23, and 34, which give the Court power to grant relief under certain circumstances, were passed: incapacisee "Relief," post, p. 232. Where a report has been obtained by means of perjury the incapacities consequent thereon may be removed on application to the High Court: 46 & 47 Vict. c. 51, s. 46, set out post, p. 560. ties in certain cases. It has been a question whether a vote of expulsion EXPULSION from the House of Commons disqualifies. King's Lynn, 6th March, 1711.-Mr. Walpole having been expelled, was again returned. Resolved :-That he was incapable of serving in that Parliament; and a new writ was ordered: 17 Journ. 128. Middlesex, 3rd February, 1769.-Mr. Wilkes was expelled for a libel on the House. A new writ was issued, when he was re-elected. Upon this return, the House resolved (17th February), that inasmuch as he had been in that session expelled the House, he was incapable of being elected to serve in that Parliament; and they ordered a new writ. He was again returned on the two following occasions, and on the last it was resolved (15th April) that Mr. L., who had stood with him on that occasion, ought to have been returned (32 Journ. 178, 228, 387); and the return was amended accordingly. But on 3rd May, 1782, the House ordered the above-mentioned vote of 17th February to be expunged, as unfit to remain on their Journals, "being subversive of the rights of the whole body of electors of this kingdom": 38 Journ. 977. Northampton, 22nd February, 1882.-Mr. Bradlaugh was expelled for disobeying the orders of the House. He was re-elected. The House affirmed its previous resolution of 22nd June, 1880, that Mr. Bradlaugh be neither allowed to take the oath nor to affirm, on the ground that he was a professed atheist. In 1884 he accepted the stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds, and 80 vacated his seat. He was again re-elected. The House OF MEMBER. MEMBER. EXPULSION again refused to let him take the oath: 253 Hans. 628; OF 266 Hans. 1347; 284 Hans. 665, 1586. In 1888 the Act of 51 & 52 Vict. c. 46, was passed, and in 1891 the resolution of 22nd June was expunged. In this instance the question of the vote of expulsion being a disqualification does not seem to have been raised. MEMBER RETURNED. A member elected and returned for one place is inALREADY eligible for any other, if he has taken the oath and his seat: Belfast, 4 O'M. & H. 105. At a General Election persons are frequently elected for more than one constituency, but they have to make their election for which of the places they will serve within the time prescribed by the sessional order of the House of Commons: see May's Parl. Prac., 10th ed., p. 614. FORMER Some instances of former disqualifications are given INCAPACI below: TIES. Residence. Qualifica tion by estate. In the early ages of our parliamentary representation it was necessary that the person chosen should come from the body of the persons represented. The practice, however, fell into disuse, and the 1 Hen. 5, c. 1, was passed to enforce it. And see 23 Hen. 6, c. 14, s. 3. The restriction, having become inoperative, was at length deemed to be unconstitutional; and in 1774 a Committee reported upon this statute, and others of similar import, that they have been decided not necessary to be observed, and a constant usage has long prevailed against them. An Act was accordingly passed (14 Geo. 3, c. 58) by which the first-mentioned statute, and so much of several others (including the 23 Hen. 6, c. 14) as related to the residence of persons to be elected, was repealed. A qualification by estate was first required in England by the 9 Anne, c. 5. By the 52 Geo. 3, c. 37, it was made sufficient if the estate was in Scotland; and by the Act of Union, if in Ireland. The qualification, however, was limited to estates in land. The 1 & 2 Vict. c. 48, s. 1, repealing the Act of Anne, made it sufficient if the FORMER INCAPACI TIES. person elected was possessed of either real or personal property of the requisite amount, i.e., 6007. per annum in counties, and 3007. per annum in boroughs, free from incumbrances. But by the 21 & 22 Vict. c. 26, all the above Acts, together with some others on the same subject, are repealed. Although the Act of 21 & 22 Vict. c. 26 is itself repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act, 1875, this does not revive any of the above Acts. Although the House, in a solitary instance, resolved Absence of that a person absent was ineligible, it is now clear that absence of itself is no disqualification: Simeon, 51; 1 Dougl. 241; Colchester, 3 Lud. 166; Southey's case, 82 Journ. 28, 108. The 7 Hen. 4, c. 15, which has been repealed by 35 & 36 Vict. c. 33, but which formerly directed the mode of making returns in counties, directed the names of the persons elected, be they "present or absent," to be written in an indenture. candidate. ment. Persons in prison for debt, at the time of the election, Imprisonwere formerly considered to be disqualified: Leinster, 8 Journ. 292. The practice of the House afterwards established a contrary doctrine: 2 Hats. 41; Vin. Abridg. "Parliament." See also 10 Journ. 356, 25th March, 1690; 2 Jac. 1, c. 13. Catholics. Roman Catholics, by 10 Geo. 4, c. 7, s. 2, became Roman capable of sitting and voting, being in all other respects duly qualified, upon taking and subscribing a certain oath therein given, for which the oath contained in the 31 & 32 Vict. c. 72, s. 14, is now substituted. Jews were not disqualified, but the sitting and voting Jews. without having taken the oath of allegiance, supremacy, and abjuration subjected them to penalties: Miller v. Salomons, 8 Exch. 788; 21 L. J., Ex. 161. In that case the defendant refused to take the oath with the words "on the true faith of a Christian " included therein. The form of oath now used does not contain those words. A member who did not believe in the existence of a Persons of Supreme Being, and upon whom an oath had no binding belief. no religious effect as an oath, but only as a solemn promise, was, INCAPACI TIES. FORMER Owing to his want of religious belief, incapable by law of making and subscribing the oath of allegiance : Attorney-General v. Bradlaugh, 14 Q. B. D. 667; 54 L. J., Q. B. 205. But now, by 51 & 52 Vict. c. 46, s. 3, the validity of an oath duly administered and taken is not affected by the absence of religious belief. This Act also provides that an affirmation is to be of the same force and effect as an oath, and may be made by any person objecting to being sworn on the ground that he has no religious belief or that the taking of an oath is contrary to his religious belief. Attorney- The Attorney-General was, for the same reasons as the judges, excluded from the House of Commons. Sir Heneage Finch, afterwards Lord Nottingham, was the first exception. The King's Counsel and Serjeants were also inadmissible. Not so the Solicitor-General. See 2 Hats. 26, 27, n. SUMMONED. THE House of Commons is summoned by an order PARLIA(issued in pursuance of a royal proclamation) from the MENT, HOW Queen in Council to the Lords High Chancellors of Writ. Great Britain and Ireland (a) commanding them to cause writs to be issued for the election of knights, citizens, and burgesses to serve in Parliament. These writs are issued from the office of the Clerk of the Crown in Chancery: 37 & 38 Vict. c. 81, s. 5. They were formerly issued by the Clerk of the Petty Bag. The ancient form of the writ, except so far as the Form of. 2 & 3 Will. 4, c. 45, s. 77; 16 & 17 Vict. c. 68, s. 1; and 30 & 31 Vict. c. 102, s. 58, required it to be varied, was in use till the year 1872, when the 35 & 36 Vict. c. 33, prescribed the form now in use. If there be any (a) Or to the Lords Keepers or Lords Commissioners of the Great Seal, if the offices of Lords High Chancellors be vacant. |