[419] Greville, "Memoirs," vol. iii. p. 389.
Up to within the last forty years it was quite sufficient for a member of Parliament to inform the Speaker that he "espied strangers" for the galleries to be instantly cleared. On April 27, 1875, however, the cantankerous and obstructive Mr. Biggar brought this rule into disrepute by calling the Speaker"s attention to the Strangers" Gallery at a time when its occupants included the Prince of Wales and the German Amba.s.sador. In accordance with the regulations of the House, these distinguished visitors were compelled to leave forthwith. This quite gratuitous act of discourtesy on the part of an extremely unpopular member was little to the taste of the House. The sentiments of the majority were aptly voiced by Disraeli when he begged Mr.
Biggar to bear in mind that the House was above all things "an a.s.sembly of gentlemen." On the Prime Minister"s motion, carried by a unanimous vote, the Standing Order relative to the exclusion of strangers was temporarily suspended, and the galleries reopened. A resolution of Disraeli"s was eventually adopted whereby strangers could only be compelled to withdraw on a division in favour of their exclusion, no debate or amendment being permitted; though it was still left to the discretion of the Speaker or Chairman to order their withdrawal at any time and from any part of the House, if necessary.
Visitors to the House of Commons enter by St Stephen"s porch, where, until recently, they were interrogated by the police constable on duty. If their answers proved satisfactory, they were admitted to the Central Hall, whence they dispatched printed cards inscribed with their names, addresses, and the object of their visit, to such members as they desired to see. The duty of ministering to the needs of friends who were anxious to listen to the debates was one of the minor discomforts of membership. There is a story of a member of Parliament receiving a letter from a const.i.tuent asking for a pa.s.s to the Speaker"s Gallery or, if that were impossible, six tickets to the Zoological Gardens. The natural inference to be gathered from this request must be that the House of Commons, which Lord Brougham once likened to a menagerie, is capable of affording six times as much entertainment as the monkey-house in Regent"s Park.
Until the last session of 1908 members could obtain two daily orders of admission for strangers from the Speaker"s secretary or the Sergeant-at-Arms, the Speaker"s and Strangers" Galleries (which were amalgamated in 1888) providing accommodation for about one hundred and sixty visitors. In the autumn of 1908, however, a man who wished to advertise the cause of Female Suffrage--and incidentally himself--threw a number of pamphlets down from the gallery on to the floor of the House, and was summarily ejected. This resulted in an order issued by the Speaker that for the remainder of the session no strangers should be admitted. The Strangers" Galleries were reopened in May of the following year, and new regulations were framed to prevent the recurrence of such a scene. Visitors are now permitted to apply at a special bureau in St. Stephen"s Hall, at any time after 4.15 p.m. and, if there is room, are at once admitted to the gallery without the formality of searching for a member. Each stranger signs a declaration undertaking to abstain from making any interruption or disturbance, and to obey the rules for the maintenance of order in the galleries.
Applause, or the expression of any feeling, is strictly prohibited in the Strangers" Gallery, and the attendants on duty there have instructions to expel offenders without waiting for any explanation of their conduct. In the commencement of the last century a stranger once shouted, "You"re a liar!" while O"Connell was speaking, and was arrested by the Sergeant-at-Arms and compelled to apologise the next day.[420] Since that time, until recently, visitors have behaved with commendable decorum.
[420] Boyd"s "Reminiscences," p. 49.
The instances of strangers causing a commotion in Parliament by extraordinary or improper behaviour are few in number. The a.s.sa.s.sination of Spencer Perceval, the Prime Minister, by a visitor in 1812 is undoubtedly the most tragic event that has ever taken place within the precincts of the House of Commons, the murderer being a mad Liverpool merchant, named Bellingham, who had a grievance against the Government. The recollection of this outrage almost gave rise to a panic some years later when a wild-eyed, haggard man rushed into the House while Sir Robert Peel was speaking, and walked boldly up to the Minister. Stopping within a few feet of the speaker, this alarming stranger made a low bow. "I beg your pardon," he remarked suavely, "but I am an unfortunate man who has just been poisoned by Earl Grey!"
He was at once removed to the nearest lunatic asylum.[421]
[421] Doyle"s "Recollections," p. 174.
Other strangers have from time to time created a mild consternation or amus.e.m.e.nt by some eccentricity of dress or deportment. In 1833 a young Scotsman crossed the bar of the Commons and sat deliberately down on a bench among the members, where he remained undiscovered for some time.
In the same year a compatriot, garbed in full Highland costume, unwittingly entered the side gallery reserved for members, and prepared to listen to the debate from this comfortable quarter. On being informed of his mistake, this hardy Northman was so overcome with terror at the contemplation of his crime and the consequences that would probably ensue--nothing short of death could, he imagined, be the punishment appropriate to such an offence--that he took to his heels and ran like a hare, never pausing for breath until he reached Somerset House, a mile and a half away.[422] Sir Wilfrid Lawson in 1894 was shown a man in the Lobby who had been turned out of the gallery for being drunk. On asking what crime the stranger had committed, he was told that he had said "Bosh!" to some of the speeches. This, as Sir Wilfrid remarked, was not conclusive evidence of drunkenness.[423]
[422] Grant"s "Recollections," p. 16.
[423] G. W. E. Russell"s "Sir Wilfrid Lawson," p. 227.
A strange Irishman provided the peers with some amus.e.m.e.nt in 1908 by appearing in the House of Lords attired in a saffron-coloured kilt and toga which he claimed to be his national costume, and which had doubtless been so ever since the days of Darwin"s missing link. He turned out to be harmless enough, and, though momentarily disturbing to Black Rod"s peace of mind, did nothing more alarming than to provide another example of the well-known fact that it is possible to be a Celt and at the same time to lack a sense of humour.
Strangers of the male s.e.x who visit the Upper House may be accommodated in the large Strangers" Gallery facing the throne, or, if members of Parliament, in the special House of Commons" gallery, or at the bar. Privy councillors and the eldest sons of peers are allowed to sit or stand upon the steps of the Throne, and there are special galleries set apart for the use of the _corps diplomatique_ and the Press.
[Ill.u.s.tration: THE HOUSE OF LORDS IN 1910]
The question of allowing women to attend the debates has long presented difficulties to the parliamentary mind, though at one time it was not unusual to see lady visitors actually sitting in the Chamber itself side by side with their husbands and friends. "Ought females to be admitted?" asked Jeremy Bentham, many years ago, unhesitatingly answering his own question in the negative a moment later. To remove them from an a.s.sembly where tranquil reason ought alone to reign was, as he explained, to avow their influence, and should not therefore be wounding to their pride. "The seductions of eloquence and ridicule are most dangerous instruments in a political a.s.sembly," he says. "Admit females--you add new force to these seductions." In the presence of the gentler s.e.x, Bentham suggests, everything must necessarily take an exalted tone, brilliant and tragical--"excitement and tropes would be scattered everywhere." All would be sacrificed to vanity and the display of wit, to please the ladies in the audience.[424] If the serious business of debate were to be sacrificed to "tropes," no doubt the British Const.i.tution would be considerably endangered; but experience has taught us that the presence of ladies has not affected the debates detrimentally, and the excitement caused in the b.r.e.a.s.t.s of our legislators by the sight of a contingent of the fair s.e.x is not of a kind to prove alarming.
[424] "Works," vol. ii. 327.
Women have taken a strong interest in political matters in England from very early days.[425] We even find them giving occasional expression to their views upon some Government measure with a violence which did not at all commend itself to the authorities. In the Journals of the House for March 5, 1606, is the following entry: "A Clamour of Women against Sir Robert Johnson, for speaking against a Bill touching Wherry-men; upon complaint of which the Commons ordered, that Notice should be given to the Justices of the Peace, to prevent and suppress such disorders."[426] What steps the Justices of the Peace took to quell this feminine clamour history does not relate. In 1675 some confusion was caused by the Speaker observing ladies in the gallery, and though a member suggested that they were not ladies at all, but merely men in fine clothes, the Speaker insisted that he had caught sight of petticoats.
[425] Ladies of rank often attended the Saxon Witenagemots, and in the reigns of Henry III., Edward I., and Edward III. certain abbesses were summoned to send proxies to Parliament. (See G. B. Smith"s "History,"
vol. i p. 11.) In the sixteenth century the right to elect a member for the rotten borough of Gatton was in the hands of a woman. See Porritt" s "Unreformed House of Commons," vol. i. p. 97.
[426] "Observations, Rules, etc.," p. 162.
In the time of Queen Anne ladies were strongly infected with the spirit of party. Addison declares that even the patches they wore on their faces were so situated that the political views of the wearer could be recognised at a glance. Friends might be distinguished from foes in this delightful fashion, Tory ladies wearing their patches on the left, Whigs on the right side of the face. An old number of the "Spectator"[427] contains the sad story of one Rosalinda, a famous Whig partisan who suffered much annoyance on this account. The fact that Rosalinda had a beautiful mole on the Tory part of her forehead gave her enemies the chance of misrepresenting her face as having revolted against the Whig interest--an accusation which naturally depressed the poor lady considerably.
[427] No. 812, June 2, 1711.
The House of Lords has always been more hospitable than the Commons in its treatment of women. The two side galleries are reserved for peeresses--though a certain portion is kept for members of the _corps diplomatique_, and for the Commons--and there is a large box on the floor of the House where the wives of peers" eldest sons sit, and a number of seats below the bar to which Black Rod may introduce ladies.
The peers have not, however, been exempt from the occasional inconveniences attaching to the presence of women. Lord Shaftesbury, during the term of his Lord Chancellorship, complained bitterly of the "droves of ladies that attended all causes," and said that things had reached such a pa.s.s that men "borrowed or hired of their friends, handsome sisters or daughters to deliver their pet.i.tions."[428] And in 1739, the fair Kitty, d.u.c.h.ess of Queensberry, headed a storming party and successfully besieged a gallery in the House of Lords from which ladies had been excluded in order to make room for members of the Commons.[429] Grenville declares that the steps of the Throne were inconveniently thronged with women in 1829. "Every fool in London thinks it necessary to be there," he says. "They fill the whole s.p.a.ce, and put themselves in front, with their large bonnets, without either fear or shame."[430]
[428] Townsend"s "Memoirs," vol. ii. p. 461.
[429] "Letters and Works of Lady M. W. Montagu," vol. ii. p. 37. (I have described this incident at length in "A Group of Scottish Women,"
pp. 137-8.)
[430] "Memoirs," 4 April, 1829.
In 1775, women were allowed to be present in Parliament to listen to election pet.i.tions, and continued to be admitted to the body of the House of Commons until 1778.[431] In this year a member named Captain Johnstone insisted that strangers should withdraw, and the female section of the audience absolutely declined to do so. Threats, entreaties, all were useless. With the charming obstinacy of their s.e.x, the fair visitors clung to their seats, and refused to budge an inch. Among the ladies who led this revolt was the d.u.c.h.ess of Devonshire, and a celebrated beauty of the name of Musters. They were a.s.sisted by a certain number of male admirers, and, so successful were their efforts, that two long hours elapsed before the galleries could be cleared. This incident caused the Speaker to forbid the future admittance of women, and until after the fire of 1834, ladies could only listen to debates clandestinely, and in a manner which entailed the maximum of personal discomfort. Their absence does not seem to have had any effect upon the length of the debates. "I was in hopes that long speeches would have been knocked on the head when the ladies were excluded from the galleries," said the doorkeeper; "they often used to keep the members up."[432]
[431] See A. Young"s "Autobiography," p. 17. (Election Pet.i.tions were tried before the whole House, and thus resolved themselves into mere party struggles. In 1770, Grenville moved that they be referred to small committees.)
[432] Pearson"s "Political Dictionary," p. 34.
When the Commons sat in the old St Stephen"s Chapel, that chamber was divided into two parts by a false roof. The upper half consisted of a big empty room like a barn, with unglazed windows. In the centre of the floor of this apartment was the ventilating shaft of the House, a rough cas.e.m.e.nt with eight small openings, situated exactly above the chandelier in the ceiling of the chamber below. To this room were conducted the lady friends of members desirous of catching a glimpse of the Commons at work. The door was locked upon them, and they were permitted to sit on a circular bench which surrounded the ventilator, and peer down through the openings, while every now and then their imprisonment would be lightened by a visit from some kindly attendant, who would tell them the name of the member addressing the House. The only light was provided by a farthing dip stuck in a tin candlestick, and the room was gloomy and depressing. It is an ill wind, however, that blows n.o.body any good, and once when O"Connell went up there expecting to find his wife, he kissed the Dowager d.u.c.h.ess of Richmond by mistake.[433]
[433] Grantley Berkeley"s "Recollections," vol. i. p. 369.
Maria Edgeworth has left a description of a visit she paid to this melancholy spot in 1822. "In the middle of the garret," she says, "is what seemed like a sentry box of deal boards, and old chairs placed round it; on these we got, and stood and peeped over the top of the boards."[434] From this vantage-point she could see the chandelier blazing just beneath her, and below it again the Table, with the mace resting upon it, and the Speaker"s polished boots--nothing more.
[434] "Life and Letters," vol. ii. p. 66.
The twenty-five tickets issued nightly by the Sergeant-at-Arms for admission to this dungeon were much sought after, a fact which testifies eloquently to the political enthusiasm of our great-grandmothers.
In spite of the Speaker"s order, ladies still continued occasionally to find their way into more comfortable parts of the House. Wraxall declares that he saw the famous d.u.c.h.ess of Gordon sitting in the Strangers" Gallery dressed as a man.[435] And in 1834, a sister of some member entered one of the side galleries, and sat there undisturbed for a long time, the gallantry of the officials forbidding them to turn her out.[436]
[435] "Posthumous Memoirs."
[436] Grant"s "Recollections," p. 17.
When the new Houses of Parliament were built, slightly better accommodation was provided for the fair s.e.x. It was at first proposed that they should be seated in the open galleries of the Commons, but this suggestion met with little support. Miss Harriet Martineau, writing somewhere about 1876, prophesied pessimistically that if such a proposition were carried out, the galleries would be occupied by giddy and frivolous women, lovers of sensation, with plenty of time upon their hands; "a nuisance to the Legislature and a serious disadvantage to the wiser of their own s.e.x."[437] This idea seems to have been the popular one, and it was resolved to keep the ladies who attended debates as much in the background as possible.
[437] "History of the Peace," vol. iii. p. 375.
The present gallery has many disadvantages. Its occupants are enclosed in a cage which prevents them from obtaining a good view of the proceedings, and altogether conceals them from the gaze of the members. Repeated attempts have been made to secure better accommodation, notably by Mr. Grantley Berkeley, to whom a number of ladies in 1841 presented a piece of plate in recognition of his services on their behalf. The House is determined, however, that its deliberations shall not be affected by the presence of any disturbing element, agreeing apparently with that member who a.s.sured the Speaker that if ladies were permitted to sit undisguised in the gallery, "the feelings of the gallant old soldiers and gentlemen would be so excited and turned from political affairs, that they would not be able to do their duty to their country."[438]
[438] Berkeley"s "Recollections," vol. i. p. 359.
The suggestion has often been made that the grille should be taken away from the front of the Ladies" Gallery, but it is doubtful whether the removal of this screen would commend itself to the visitors. Its retention bestows one undoubted benefit upon them; it allows ladies to steal away unnoticed during the speech of some bore, with whom they may be personally acquainted, or whose feelings they would not like to hurt. This is an advantage which cannot be esteemed too highly.
The Ladies" Gallery, which, as has often been said, might be called, but for its occupants, a veritable "chamber of horrors," is not considered to be within the House. Consequently, when strangers are forced to withdraw, ladies may still remain. They are even allowed to be present during prayers. The feminine privilege of not being excluded with other strangers is shared by the peers, who, since 1698, have always (with the exception of a few years) had a gallery reserved for them.
Up to a short time ago members of the House of Commons were allowed to introduce ladies to the inner lobby, whence they could obtain a fragmentary glimpse of the proceedings through a small window. This privilege was withdrawn in 1908, when a lady who was the guest of a member sought to make some return for his hospitality by rushing on to the floor of the House and shouting, "Votes for Women!" Shortly before this two other ladies in the gallery, also the guests of members, had attempted to prove the fitness of their s.e.x for the franchise by chaining themselves to the grille and screaming. This was the first instance of unruly behaviour in the Ladies" Gallery since June of the year 1888, when some women applauded a speech, much to the indignation of Speaker Peel. It resulted in the closing of the gallery, and the exclusion of all but the Speaker"s own personal guests, on whose sense of honour and decency he could rely. In 1909, however, the Ladies"
Gallery was once more thrown open to members of the fair s.e.x, tickets of admission being confined to the relatives of members, who balloted for them a week in advance. The ladies were required to sign an undertaking to behave decorously while they occupied seats in the gallery, and their exact relationship to members was not inquired into too closely.
CHAPTER XVI