Before proceeding with the business on the Order Paper I presume I am entitled to ask a question arising out of the Official Report of the proceedings of our last meeting. The question I wish respectfully to put to you, Sir, is how does the motion stand which was under discussion when the business of the House collapsed for want of a quorum on last Wednesday?

The motion disappears according to a precedent established some time ago.

Without in the least questioning your ruling I wish to draw your attention to Standing Order No. 106.

I am bound by precedent. There was a definite precedent established on the 15th December, 1926. A very similar matter arose on that occasion and the business appeared on the Paper no more. I am bound by precedent and this Standing Order does not apply.

I am not in the least objecting to your ruling, but with all due deference I think Standing Orders should come before precedents. The Standing Order refers in the following terms to business undisposed of:—

All business undisposed of at the adjournment of the Seanad shall stand postponed until the next sitting day unless the Seanad shall otherwise order and shall be placed on the Order Paper for that day.

If you, sir, rule that precedents knock out Standing Orders I bow to your decision.

I ruled that the motion should not appear on the Order Paper and the motion does not appear on it.

The Standing Order followed the precedent. I just point out that the Standing Order was adopted in 1930 and the precedent was made in 1927.

The previous Standing Order was practically the same as the present Standing Order.