Standing Orders and Precedents in the Irish House of Commons in the 17th and 18th Centuries

Abstract

AbstractThis article examines two parts of the procedural framework of the Irish house of commons in the 17th and 18th centuries. In contrast to the Westminster house of commons, precedents and standing orders played a less prominent part in the operation of the Irish House. The article examines how the Irish house of commons used and made precedents and standing orders. In the 17th century the House not only looked to its own precedents but also to Westminster procedures, which exercised a strong pull. Westminster procedures were imported as rules and orders. By the end of the century the House effectively did not use its own precedents as a source for its constitutional claims. From 1695 to 1715 standing orders were used by the Irish house of commons as one method to secure new privileges as a representative body, to assert its claims, especially to the control of finance, and to regulate and improve its integrity and efficiency of operation. The stimulus and conduit for change were a growing print culture, the shared political alignment of politics in Westminster and Dublin and contacts between politicians and parliamentary officials. Standing orders allowed Westminster practices to be adopted silently under the cloak of ‘the constitution of parliament’, possibly to protect and enhance emerging ‘patriot’ sensibilities. After 1715 the pace of change slowed and the Dublin House diverged from Westminster in its approach to standing orders. Members assumed that these lasted no longer than a parliament and required revival. The Irish house of commons established neither a definitive compendium nor authoritative arbiter of its rules. Westminster standing orders and manuals exercised a major, even predominant influence, but were used à la carte, and interpretation of procedural rules was often through debate, some of which was muddled, and application was determined by those who could command a majority.