THE PALACE OP WESTMINSTER.
41
A writer in 1761 informs us, that “ Although the Speaker always adjourns the House to nine o’clock“ of the morning of the day when they agree to meet again, the House seldom meets till twelve.” Tillvery recently the House did not meet for the despatch of public business until five in the afternoon—alater hour than that at which Hyde thought it “ disorderly” for the House to remain sitting; and itseldom rises before midnight, and often remains sitting until two, three, or four in the morning. Therehas of late years been occasionally an early sitting, from twelve till three, for the reception of petitions.
It appears that so long as the two Houses sat together, the Commons had no fixed Speaker; butafter deliberating on a subject, they made choice of one of their number, who was presumed to be bestacquainted with the business in hand to deliver the conclusion at which they had arrived. This practicewas found to occasion delays, and as the Commons could not have a regular President while the twoHouses sat together, it is considered one of the principal causes, if not the only cause, that led to theseparation. The best way therefore, according to Sir Edward Coke , to ascertain the time when thisdivision took place, would be to find when the Commons first had a settled Speaker, as at present. Afterthe separation, the same writer adds, that the Commons sat in the Chapter House of the Abbot ofWestminster, and cites, as his authority, a Parliament roll of Edward III. , which consequently provedthat the separation had previously taken place. The Commons assembled in the Chapter House adjoining“ Poets’ Cornerof course by the sufferance of the Abbot of Westminster. The Abbots of Westminsterwere in those days great personages, and Lords in Parliament ; and it does not appear that they held theprivileges of the Commons in very high respect. On one occasion the Commons, “ forgetting the solemn“ purposes of their assembling, became so riotous, and created so great turmoil, that the Abbot waxed“ indignant at the profanation, and collected a sufficient strong party, turned the whole legislative wisdom“ out of his House, swearing lustily that the place should not again be defiled with a like rabble.”
The necessary and frequent communications between the two Houses, in the progress of Parliamentary business, doubtless occasioned much inconvenience to bo experienced, on account of the distance, whilethe Commons sat in the Chapter House and the Lords in a room of the Old Palace, on the east side ofOld Palace Yard. It is not, therefore, surprising that, when an opportunity offered, St. Stephen’s Chapel should have been thought of for the meetings of the Commons. In what manner it was fitted up forthis purpose is no where explained; but it is supposed that the paintings, with which the stone walls ofthe original Chapel were ornamented, were, previously to that time, exposed to view, and that they were,on that occasion, wainscoted up, and remained forgotten and unknown until the period to which wehave already adverted.
Hutton, in his ‘ New View of London, ’ thus speaks of the House in 1708 :—“ The Commons’ House“ is a little to the northward from the Lords, somewhat nearer the Hall, a commodious building, accom-“ modated with several ranks of seats, covered with green, and matted under foot, for five hundred and“ thirteen gentlemen, of which number this honourable, learned, and judicious assembly consists,—the“ like, in all these respects, perhaps nowhere to be paralleled. On three sides of this House are beautiful" wainscot galleries, sustained by cantelevers enriched with fruit and other carved curiosities.”