Unlike some other reproductions of classic texts (1) We have not used OCR(Optical Character Recognition), as this leads to bad quality books with introduced typos. (2) In books where there are images such as portraits, maps, sketches etc We have endeavoured to keep the quality of these images, so they represent accurately the original artefact. Although occasionally there may be certain imperfections with these old texts, we feel they deserve to be made available for future generations to enjoy.

Currently, parliament as a political institution does not enjoy the best reputation. This book aims to recover less known political resources of the parliamentary mode of proceeding. The parliamentary procedure relies on regulating debates in a fair way and on constructing opposed perspectives on the agenda items. The British House of Commons provides the closest historical approximation for the parliamentary ideal type of politics. This book deals with the formation and conceptual change in the Westminster procedure, based on the way they are interpreted in the tracts on procedure. The tracts illustrate the changing parliamentary self-understanding from the 1570s to the present and the growing political role of procedural disputes. The parliamentary style of politics, as discussed in the tracts, can be divided into two genres: the politics of agenda-setting and the politics of debate. The book analyses their formation and overall conceptual change as well as the procedural responses to the increasingly scarce parliamentary time from the period after the 1832 parliamentary reform. It insists that in spite of claims on urgency and on government’s leadership the procedural resources of the House of Commons contribute to maintaining the debate-centred parliamentary style of politics.

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1855 edition. Excerpt: ...If the committee cannot go through the whole bill at Report of proone sitting in the Lords, the chairman leaves the chair, STCSS" and moves that the house be put into committee on a future day; and in the Commons, the committee instruct the chairman to report progress, and ask leave to sit again. When the bill has been fully considered, the chairman Report of tho puts a question, " That I do report this bill with the amendments to the house;" which being agreed to, the sitting of the committee is concluded, and Mr. Speaker resumes his chair; upon which the chairman approaches the steps of the speaker's chair, and reports from the committee that "they had gone through the bill, and had made amendments," or " several amendments thereunto." If no amendments have been made, he reports " that they had gone through the bill, and directed him to report the same, without amendment." In the Lords the bill is at once reported if there be no amendments; but there is a standing order, 28th June 1715, which declares " that no report be received from any committee of the whole house, the same day such committee goes through the bill, when any amendments are made to such bill."1 By standing order of the Commons, 25th June 1852, Proceedings on " At the close of the proceedings of a committee of the whole house on a hill, the chairman shall report the hill forthwith to the house, and when amendments shall have heen made thereto, the same shall be received without debate, and a time appointed for taking the same into consideration." When the report has been received, if no amendments have been made, the bill is usually ordered to be read a third time on a future day. If amendments have been...

This book sets out and explores the case for a modernised impeachment process for the United Kingdom. The work examines the present law and history of impeachment in the United Kingdom, which today is widely regarded as having fallen into desuetude and its procedures inappropriate for modern conditions. It discusses how impeachment operates in two countries, the United States and Denmark, selected respectively for their marked differences from and similarities to the United Kingdom’s political and constitutional system, for the purposes of illumination and possible lessons for a new impeachment process. The book seeks to provide a balanced and independent examination of the case for this, concluding that it would have a valuable role to play in the future development of the United Kingdom’s system of politics and government. It concludes by setting out a detailed model for the structure, working and effect of impeachment. The book will be of interest to students, academics and policy-makers working in the areas of constitutional law and politics.