« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »
HODGES, MCLEAN v.
HOLLANDER V. ATKINSON 104 | HOOD v. CULLEN 22 | HUMPHREY, WENTWORTH v.
22 1, 38
COLEMAN v. DE LISSA
C A SE S
ARGUED AND DETERMINED IN THB
SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES:
Common Law Jurisdiction,
DURING THE FIRST TERM, 1885.
TAYLOR v. BARTON.*
1884 Power of Assembly to adopt rules of the Imperial Parliament subsequently passed—18
Nov. 20. & 19 Vict. c. 54, sec. 35 of Schedule— Power of Assembly to suspend a member
Dec. 9. from the service of the House. By sec. 35 of the Schedule of the Act 18 & 19 Vict. c. 54, power was given to Martin C.J., the Legislative Assembly in its first session, and "from time to time afterwards,” to Windeyer J. prepare and adopt such standing rules as should appear best adapted for the pur. and pose there enumerated, all of which “ rules and orders shall be laid before the
Innes J. Governor, and being by him approved shall become binding and of force.”
By the first of the standing orders regulating the practice and conduct of the business of the Assembly “in all cases not specially provided for hereinafter, or by sessional or other orders, resort shall be had to the rules, forms, and usages of the Imperial Parliament, which shall be followed so far as the same can be applied to the proceedings of this House."
Held, that rules made by the Imperial Parliament after the passing of the first of the standing orders, not having been laid before the Governor, and not having been approved by him, had no validity. The adoption by the Governor cannot take place until the rules are in existence for him to approve of. If the standing order in terms professes to adopt rules of the Imperial Parliament to be made thereafter, it is ultra vires and of no effect.
Held, also, independently of this, that the standing order in question does not in terms apply to such future rules of the Imperial Parliament.
To an action brought by a member of the Legislative Assembly against the Speaker-). For expelling the plaintiff from the Assembly Chamber ; 2. For assaulting the plaintiff and keeping him from entering the Assembly Chamber—the defendant pleaded (inter alia) that a resolution was passed by the Committee of the whole House of Assembly that the plaintiff, having been named by the Chair.
* Decided last Term.
man as having persistently and wilfully obstructed the business of the Committee, be suspended from the service of the House. Upon report to the Assembly, a resolution of that body was passed that the plaintiff be suspended from the service of the House. And afterwards, during the same session of Parliament, and while the said suspension still remained in force, the plaintiff entered the Assembly and claimed the right to sit and serve as such member. And thereupon the deipdant, as such Speaker as aforesaid, upon the refusal of the plaintiff to withdraw, under the authority of the said resolution, and in order to enforce the same, directed the Sergeant-at-Arms to remove the plaintiff from the said Chazuber, and the said Sergeant-at-Arms then gently laid his hand, etc.
Held, that, by the plea, a right was set up in the Assembly to suspend a member for some time, definite or indefinite, quite apart from the question of the obstruc'tive conduct actually existing. A right was therefore claimed to punish or coerce such member, even after the obstruction was over, and was no longer apprehended. That right the Assembly does not possess. The Assembly has no power to punish an obstructing member, or to remove him from the Chamber for any period longer than the sitting during which the obstruction occurred.
Semble, that the Assembly may expel a member if sufficient grounds exist to warrant such an extreme course, and of such sufficiency the House itself is the sole judge. Or the member may be removed to enable the business of any given sitting to go on, and for that purpose he may be kept excluded during that sitting.
DEMURRER. Declaration : Adolphus George Taylor sues Edmund Barton, Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of New South Wales, for that at Sydney, in the colony aforesaid, on the 22nd day of April 1884, the said Edmund Barton assaulted the said Adolphus George Taylor, he the said Adolphus George Taylor being at the time a member of the Legislative Assembly of New South Wales and one of the three members returned by the electoral district of Mudgee in the colony aforesaid under and by virtue of the Act 44 Vict. No. 13, and being then in the Legislative Assembly Chamber and about to consult, treat, deliberate, and give his vote in a meeting of the members then and there assembled to consult, treat, deliberate, and vote; and then pushed, shoved, and expelled, or caused to be pushed, , shoved, and expelled, the said Adolphus George Taylor out of the said Legislative Assembly Chamber, and hindered and prevented him, the said Adolphus George Taylor, from remaining in and attending and being present at the said meeting. And afterwards, to wit on the 23rd day of April 1884, prevented the said Adolphus George Taylor from entering and remaining in the said Chamber as aforesaid, whereby the said Adolphus George Taylor was totally hindered, prevented, and excluded from re