Re Bristol South-East Parliamentary Election

Last updated

Re Bristol South-East Parliamentary Election 1961
Royal Coat of Arms of the United Kingdom (St Edward's Crown).svg
Court Election court
Citation[1964] 2 QB 257, [1961] 3 All ER 354
Case history
Related action Peerage Act 1963
Court membership
Judges sittingMr Justice Gorman, Mr Justice McNair
Keywords
  • disclaiming peerages

Re Bristol South-East Parliamentary Election ([1964] 2 QB 257, [1961] 3 All ER 354) is a 1961 United Kingdom election court case brought about by an election petition by Malcolm St Clair against Anthony Wedgewood Benn, 2nd Viscount Stansgate (also known as Tony Benn), the winner of the 1961 Bristol South-East by-election where Benn had won the most votes but was disqualified from taking his seat in the House of Commons as he had inherited a hereditary peerage as 2nd Viscount Stansgate. [1] Benn argued that as he had not applied for a writ of summons, he was not a member of the House of Lords and that the voters had the right to choose who they wanted to represent them. [2]

Contents

The court made a ruling of undue election because the voters were aware that Benn was legally disqualified from sitting in the House of Commons, their votes had to be counted as being "thrown away" and Malcolm St Clair as the runner-up would take the seat instead. [3]

Background

Anthony Wedgwood Benn had been elected as the MP for Bristol South East since 1950 as a Labour Party candidate. During that time he was heir to the Viscount Stansgate title held by his father William Wedgwood Benn, 1st Viscount Stansgate, which Benn tried several times to renounce his right to. When his father died in 1960, Benn called the Speaker of the House of Commons to inform him of this. The Speaker told Benn that because he was now legally a peer, he was disqualified from sitting and speaking in the House of Commons. [4] A by-election was called and Benn decided to fight it anyway. The Conservative Party candidate, Malcolm St Clair, ran several adverts in local papers telling voters that there was no point in voting for Benn as he was disqualified from sitting in the House of Commons as he was a hereditary peer. [5] Despite this, Benn won the election and went to the door of the House of Commons to take his oath of allegiance. However the doorkeeper of the House had been told by the Speaker to not allow Benn access, specifically authorising the use of force to prevent him entering, [4] because he was not legally allowed in the Commons as a hereditary peer. [4]

St Clair issued an election petition against the results stating that Benn could not take his seat as he was disqualified. [6] The petition was accepted by the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice of England and Wales and the case would be heard by an election court. During the two months preceding the case, Benn along with his sons Stephen and Hilary, and his legal advisor Michael Zander were granted permission by the Speaker to access the House of Commons Library to help with their case. [2]

Court hearing

Against legal advice of the Labour Party's Queen's Counsels, Benn represented himself in pro per during the proceedings. [2] During his opening address, Benn took 22 hours to make it and took 537 questions while doing so. [2] Sir Andrew Clark QC, acting as St Clair's barrister argued in his response that a peer upon succession, regardless of whether they had asked for one or not, was entitled to a writ of summons to the House of Lords which the Crown could not refuse to grant. He argued that merely having that right was grounds for disqualification as being a member of the House of Lords was incompatible with being an MP in the House of Commons. [2]

Benn argued that to expel an elected member of the House of Commons on the grounds that he had the right for a writ of summons, was to punish him for doing something he had not done. He cited that there was no precedent to punish a hereditary peer for refusing a writ of summons and referenced the Garter King of Arms's Register of Lords Spiritual and Temporal, where there were forty instances in 500 years of peers not claiming their right to a writ. [2] Since 1955, if a peer did not reply to the Lord Chancellor in relation to their right, they were deemed to be on a leave of absence and attendance was not expected. [2]

Verdict

Mr Justice Gorman and Mr Justice McNair delivered their verdict, which took two hours to read out. During it they praised Benn for "the magnificent way he had presented his case". [2] However, they found the election of Benn to be undue, as he had succeeded his father as Viscount Stansgate and thus was disqualified from being elected as a hereditary peer. [7] They stated that a hereditary peerage was "an incorporeal hereditament affixed to your blood and annexed for posterity". [5] They made their judgement in favour of St Clair as because the voters knew that Benn was disqualified during the election campaign, their votes were to be treated as being "thrown away" as they had been given notice by St Clair of Benn's ineligibility. [8] Benn's attempts to renounce his title were stated as being too technical for voters to have easily understood. [3] As a result, St Clair was elected in place of Benn. [3]

Aftermath

Despite losing the court case, Benn continued to campaign to be able to renounce his peerage. The Peerage Act 1963 was passed which allowed for hereditary peers to disclaim their peerage and surrender their right to sit in the House of Lords. [5] This act was created partially as a result of Benn's campaign but also because of the Conservative Party wishing for either Alec Douglas-Home, Earl of Home or Quintin Hogg, Viscount Hailsham to become Prime Minister and it was considered constitutionally inappropriate for the Prime Minister to sit in the House of Lords. [5] Benn took the opportunity to disclaim his title 22 minutes after the bill had come into law. [9] [10] St Clair, acting pursuant to a promise he made to respect the wishes of the people of his constituency, agreed to take the position of Crown Steward and Bailiff of the Manor of Northstead, an office of profit under the Crown, in order to disqualify himself from his seat. This forced a by-election which Benn won, allowing him to reclaim his seat in the House of Commons. [11] Benn left the House of Commons for the last time in 2001. At the time, hints were dropped to Benn to see if he would take a life peerage to enter the House of Lords but Benn rebuffed them saying "I wouldn't be seen dead in the place". [12]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Peerages in the United Kingdom</span> Noble titles in the United Kingdom

Peerages in the United Kingdom form a legal system comprising both hereditary and lifetime titles, composed of various ranks, and within the framework of the Constitution of the United Kingdom form a constituent part of the legislative process and the British honours system. The British monarch is considered the fount of honour and is notionally the only person who can grant peerages, though there are many conventions about how this power is used, especially at the request of the British government. The term peerage can be used both collectively to refer to the entire body of titled nobility, and individually to refer to a specific title. British peerage title holders are termed peers of the Realm.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Peerage Act 1963</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Peerage Act 1963 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that permits women peeresses and all Scottish hereditary peers to sit in the House of Lords and allows newly inherited hereditary peerages to be disclaimed.

The Peerage of Scotland is one of the five divisions of peerages in the United Kingdom and for those peers created by the King of Scots before 1707. Following that year's Treaty of Union, the Kingdom of Scots and the Kingdom of England were combined under the name of Great Britain, and a new Peerage of Great Britain was introduced in which subsequent titles were created.

In the United Kingdom, representative peers were those peers elected by the members of the Peerage of Scotland and the Peerage of Ireland to sit in the British House of Lords. Until 1999, all members of the Peerage of England held the right to sit in the House of Lords; they did not elect a limited group of representatives. All peers who were created after 1707 as Peers of Great Britain and after 1801 as Peers of the United Kingdom held the same right to sit in the House of Lords.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">House of Lords Act 1999</span> UK law removing hereditary peerage from the House of Lords

The House of Lords Act 1999 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that reformed the House of Lords, one of the chambers of Parliament. The Act was given Royal Assent on 11 November 1999. For centuries, the House of Lords had included several hundred members who inherited their seats ; the Act removed such a right. However, as part of a compromise, the Act allowed ninety-two hereditary peers to remain in the House. Another ten were created life peers to enable them to remain in the House.

Baron Oranmore and Browne, of Carrabrowne Castle in the County of Galway and of Castle Macgarrett in the County of Mayo, is a title in the Peerage of Ireland. It was created in 1836 for Dominick Browne, who had earlier represented County Mayo in the House of Commons. His son, the second Baron, sat in the House of Lords as an Irish representative peer from 1869 to 1900. Lord Oranmore and Browne assumed the surname of Guthrie on his marriage in 1859 to Christina Guthrie. He was succeeded by his son, the third Baron. He was an Irish Representative Peer from 1902 to 1926 and a member of the short-lived Senate of Southern Ireland. In 1926 he was created Baron Mereworth, of Mereworth Castle in the County of Kent, in the Peerage of the United Kingdom. This title gave the barons an automatic seat in the House of Lords until the passing of the House of Lords Act 1999. On his death in 1927 the title passed to his son, the fourth Baron. He married, as his third wife, the actress Sally Gray. Lord Oranmore and Browne died in August 2002, aged 100 years and 291 days. He was thereby the third-oldest hereditary peer ever. As of 2014 the titles are held by his son, the fifth Baron, who succeeded in 2002.

The hereditary peers form part of the peerage in the United Kingdom. As of August 2023, there are 805 hereditary peers: 30 dukes, 34 marquesses, 189 earls, 110 viscounts, and 442 barons.

The history of the British peerage, a system of nobility found in the United Kingdom, stretches over the last thousand years. The current form of the British peerage has been a process of development. While the ranks of baron and earl predate the British peerage itself, the ranks of duke and marquess were introduced to England in the 14th century. The rank of viscount came later, in the mid-15th century. Peers were summoned to Parliament, forming the House of Lords.

The British peerage is governed by a body of law that has developed over several centuries. Much of this law has been established by a few important cases, and some of the more significant of these are addressed in this article.

In the United Kingdom, life peers are appointed members of the peerage whose titles cannot be inherited, in contrast to hereditary peers. Life peers are appointed by the monarch on the advice of the prime minister. With the exception of the Dukedom of Edinburgh awarded for life to Prince Edward in 2023, all life peerages conferred since 2009 have been created under the Life Peerages Act 1958 with the rank of baron and entitle their holders to sit and vote in the House of Lords, presuming they meet qualifications such as age and citizenship. The legitimate children of a life peer appointed under the Life Peerages Act 1958 are entitled to style themselves with the prefix "The Honourable", although they cannot inherit the peerage itself. Prior to 2009, life peers of baronial rank could also be so created under the Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1876 for senior judges.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Life Peerages Act 1958</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Life Peerages Act 1958 established the modern standards for the creation of life peers by the Sovereign of the United Kingdom.

A writ in acceleration, commonly called a writ of acceleration, is a type of writ of summons that enabled the eldest son and heir apparent of a peer with more than one peerage to attend the British or Irish House of Lords, using one of his father's subsidiary titles, during his father's lifetime. This procedure could be used to bring younger men into the Lords and increase the number of capable members in a house that drew on a very small pool of talent.

Malcolm Archibald James St Clair was a British Conservative Party politician and Army officer.

Since 1997 the United Kingdom government has been engaged in reforming the House of Lords, the upper house of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. The history of reform before 1997, is set out in sections below about reforms of composition and powers carried out in the past and of unsuccessful proposals and attempts at reform in the twentieth century. Proposals include decreasing the number of lords, introducing a system where lords are democratically elected, or abolition of the House of Lords in favour of a unicameral Parliament.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1984 Chesterfield by-election</span> Election in United Kingdom

The 1984 Chesterfield by-election was held on 1 March 1984 for a seat in the House of Commons to represent Chesterfield in Derbyshire. This followed the resignation of the sitting Labour Member of Parliament (MP) Eric Varley.

The 1961 Bristol South East by-election was a by-election held on 4 May 1961 for the British House of Commons constituency of Bristol South East in the city of Bristol.

The 1963 Bristol South East by-election was a by-election held on 20 August 1963 for the British House of Commons constituency of Bristol South East in the city of Bristol.

The Roll of the Peerage is a public record registering peers in the peerages of England, Scotland, Ireland, Great Britain and the United Kingdom. It was created by Royal Warrant of Queen Elizabeth II dated 1 June 2004, is maintained by the Crown Office within the United Kingdom's Ministry of Justice, and is published by the College of Arms.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stephen Benn, 3rd Viscount Stansgate</span> British scientist

Stephen Michael Wedgwood Benn, 3rd Viscount Stansgate, is a British hereditary peer and Labour member of the House of Lords.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sebastian Grigg, 4th Baron Altrincham</span> British peer

Edward Sebastian Grigg, 4th Baron Altrincham is a British hereditary peer and Conservative member of the House of Lords.

References

  1. ↑ "No parity for peers". The Modern Law Review. 24 (6): 757–802. 1961. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2230.1961.tb00672.x .
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Zander, Michael. "How to lose a title". New Law Journal. Retrieved 4 May 2018.(subscription required)
  3. 1 2 3 "Legal challenge to elections" (PDF). Law Commission. Retrieved 4 May 2018.
  4. 1 2 3 Powell, David (2001). Tony Benn: A Political Life . Bloomsbury Publishing. pp.  20–21. ISBN   978-0826456991.
  5. 1 2 3 4 "Peers' battle to stay in the Commons". BBC News. 26 July 2013. Retrieved 4 May 2018.
  6. ↑ "Election petitions". BBC News. 20 August 2008. Retrieved 4 May 2018.
  7. ↑ "Election Court Hearing – Tony Benn – The Strand, London". PA Images. Retrieved 4 May 2018.
  8. ↑ Davies, Leila (10 November 2003). "Letters – Without peerage". New Statesman. Retrieved 4 May 2018.
  9. ↑ "page 6534, Issue 43072". The London Gazette. 2 August 1963. Retrieved 4 May 2018.
  10. ↑ Boffey, Daniel (16 March 2014). "Tony Benn's son inherits title his father gave up". The Guardian. Retrieved 9 June 2022.
  11. ↑ "Profile: Tony Benn". BBC. Retrieved 4 May 2018.
  12. ↑ "1963 Peerage Act and former Labour MP Tony Benn". BBC News. 1 July 2011. Retrieved 18 September 2020.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.