The Sun. — London, England, 1835-02-20 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS, FEB. 19, 1825. THE ELECTION OF SPEAKER. Lord F. EGERTON'S Speech concluded from our First Edition yesterday, and which we gave in our Express Edition last night :—From this great occasion of the meeting of the House, it becomes us to approach the election of a Speaker with calm deliberation, and also one who, on account of his tried ability and experience, is most adapted to conduct the bu siness of the House with that judgment and discretion with which it has been filled.—( Hear, hear.) I do regret that it has become imperative on me to address ) ou on this ques tion, or that it should not meet with that unanimity which I think it so well deserves. I do regret, for my own part, that these circumstances should be likely to place us in •Dposition to many Hon. Gentleman with whom I have been t i terms of the greatest intimacy, and whom I know, esteem, and regard so much, not as I conceive on one of those ques tions of great political interest, or of great political discussion, but one on which, I lament to think, that their ener gies should be lavished and abused, and that it may thereby tend to the collision of parties for whom I entertain marked feelings of friendship and respect.—( Hear, hear.) At the same time, I do not think that I shall have to hear any cf those motions which imply opposition against the motion which I have the honour to submit to the House, founded on any of these charges of notorious absurdity which have found their way into circulation in other quarters, and which, for the last few days, have been before the atten tion of the public. I do not think that I shall meet with any of those absurd calumnies which have found their way into notice from publications such as the " Mirror of Faihion," and some others which I do not feel myself called upon to name—some of those publications, which gain their mysterious information by tracking out scenes of private life, and reducing them to those ourposes which they understand so well. I do not think that I shall have to contradict any of those unfounded imputations, or that the opposition which will be raised against my Right Honourable Friend will place its claims on such a source, but on the contrary that the opposition is tobe rested on a great public principle—(Tremendous cheering from the opposition benches.) I shall content myself by resting his elaims on the good sense of this House, and on the known integrity, talent, and courtesy with which he has conducted its business hitherto. The Noble Lord whom I believe I may salute as the intended leader of this House—(Loud cheers from the opposition) whether self-elected---( Reiterated cheers from the Ministerial Benches)—or whether enlisted under the banners of the Opposition—amid the clash of weapons, and party strife, I do not know ; but it appears he is to be the champion of the party over whom one shout alone predo minates, decidedly the shout of a populace, which as yet has been so obscared, that I am left to conjecture about its origin ; but which has been promulgated on the hustings to admiring con stituents—the princ i ple of condemnation without trial.— ( Cheers from the Ministerial Benches, re-echoed by the Oppo sition.) If this be the principi6 which is to flash conviction on the doubting, to fix the waverer, aml to reinstate the phalanx which by various accidents has been somewhat disbanded, I trust those Hon. Gentlemen who support ilmt principle will be able to speak to this House, and to carry that prin.:loe into effect without violation of their own consistency, and within the spirit of the principle which on the last occasion they raised very eloquent voices - to combat and repudiate ; namely, to repudiate political considerations, and the estimation of poli tical opinions on the individual who was to be called to the chair ; but to set aside all other considerations of talent, fitness, ability, experience, and even of what may be new to the ear of some gentlemen, considerations of public utility. Before I conclude the observations I have taken the liberty of address ing to the House upon the motion which I am to make, I ma t beg to express my confidence that I have avoided any expression which may appear to be clothed with disrespect to any Gen tleman who has been named by public report as a candidate for the office. With regard to the Hon. Gentleman who is likely, as we understand, to be proposed to this House as Speaker, certainly, whatever may be the opinion entertained by this House, or by his frieuds, he is, at least, so far superior to me in every respect, and commands the deference of this House in such a manner, that it would very ill become me ever to question his fitness for that office in any one particular ; and I beg to express to him that honest feeling of' respect and deference which I will not say he himself might expect, but the nicest sensibility of his friends . may consider to be due. I should have been more content, however, if a task so honour able and so completely consonant with my feelings, that of proposing my Right Honourable Friend for the Chair, had fallen into worthier, and into hands perhaps more exempt from the suspicion of private partiality. I have the satisfaction however of knowing that my execution of this duty, however imperfect, or however unsatisfactory it may have been to my self, will not be unsatisfactory to a large majority of a great constituency that has sent me here.—( Hear, hear, hear.) At all events, I am satisfied that if the occasion ever arrive, on which I shall have to answer at the bar of offended public opinion for any errors in judgment or feeling, or any incapacity, I trust that this will be the first occasion and the last on which those who blame me will fix.—( Hear, hear.) I beg to con clude with moving that the Right Honourable Sir Charles Manners Sutton do take the Chair.—( Loud cheers.) Sir CHARLES BURRELL then rose and said--I do not hesitate to offer myself as the seconder of the motion which has been proposed ; but I should hesitate to detain the House with a lengthened speech, after the very eloquent one of the Noble Lora. Though differing , in some respects with the Right Hon. Gentleman whom he has proposed, I beg to ex press my conviction of his superiority over every other Member of this House to become its Chairman, without meaning to disparage any one, or that other Right Hon. Gentleman, for whom I entertain the highest respect. What I am about to do I do from firm persuasion. i had the honour to second his nomination in the year 1817, and from that time until the present I have noticed his candour, his efficiency, dud his impartiality. —( Hear.) With these feelings I should do injVafice to him, avid to my own character, if I satisfied myself wiiLi giving a silent vote on this occason.—( Hear, hear.) 'f!le House, then, will be justified in supporting this motion. as it was justified in electing him before, by the attention, ability, and efficiency which the Right Hon. Gentleman has displayed. Under such circumstances, I trust the House will reflect before they decide, and the Noble Lord has rightly observed, that we are assembled under very peculiar circumstances. But under any circumstances, we want a man whose knowledge and talent will assist us in the business of the House, and no man can be more fitted for the Chair, and to expedite the business than one who has had so much practice, and before whom no gentleman, however excellent his cha racter, or however fair his pretensions, can on that account be preferred. I therefore most cordially assent to the motion of the Noble Lord, and will not detain the House longer, feeling that any thing I could add would be superfluous. Mr. DEN IS ON then rose. He said, I can assure the House that it is with great reluctance I rise to trespass upon its attention, and nothing but an imperious sense of duty could induce me to come forward at the present important crisis—at a period in which the public mind is so much excited, and when the eyes, not only of this country and of Europe, but of the whole civilized world, are directed to our proceedings. In a great part of what has fallen ffom the Noble Lord, ( Sandon) whose appearance in this House I am happy to observe, I fully concur, nor do I object to much that has been expressed by the Hon. Baronet who seconded the motion, in all they have stated respecting the qu a liti es o f t h e Right Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Cambridge, respect ing all the virtues, of his private character, and respecting the dignified manner in which he demeaned himself while in the Chair of this House.—( Hear, hear, and cheers. ) But this is not a Question of personal character—it is one in which a great public principle is involved—( Cheers and laughter from the Ministerial side)—and however the Noble Lord may sneer at public principle, I trust the House will not despise it. The Noble Lord has thrown more aspe rity into the debate than in my opinion is required ; and although he has leaped his s light courser beyond bound, I will not now imitate his example. It is, I repeat, on the assertion of a great public principle that I rise to trespass on the attention of the House, called upon, as it now is, to decide upon a question in which the interests of thousands are in volved. His Majesty, in the exercise of his undoubted right, dissolved i.he last Parliament ; the people responded to the call, and have returned a majority of representatives steadily attached to the great principles of the Reform Bill.— ( Cheers.) With all respe,:q for the talents and character of the Right Hon. the Member fo, - the University of Cambridge, I think it incumbent on' this House that a Gentleman be placed in the chair, the highest situation to wlzich any Commoner can aspire—the representative of the greatezt assemblage in the Universe should be assimilated in principle to the majority of the members over whom he presides, "as coming events cast their shadows before." We must, in deciding this question, take into consideration the measures which the Right Honourable Baronet at the head of his Majesty's Govern ment, proposes to bring before the House. In the discussion of Corporation Reform—the Bill for the relief of the Dissenters—the motion of the Hon. Member for St. Albans, and of that crying of all grievances, the state of the Irish Church—in the discussion as to the dismissal of the Melbourne Administration unheard and without a trial— without that trial which the Right Hon. Baronet and his friends around him are so sedulous in demanding, foi getting the principle of " do as you wish to be done by"—in the debate which must take place on the unprecedented assumption of the reins of Government, for three weeks, by one individual, who however high in station or renowned for his military achieve ments abroad, should have been deterred from such a hazard ous undertaking—in all these discussions, it will be incumbent on the House to have a gentleman in the Chair, who acting with impartiality and dignity will agree with the majority of the House. But a time may arrive when a difference of opinion with the other House may take place. In such an emergency it would be requisite to have a gentleman in the chair whose sentiments will be perfectly identified with the principles of the Reform Bill. In rising to propose the Right Hon. the Member for Edinburgh, as he is present, I cannot say all I think respecting him, but this I must say, that there is no gentleman, in my opinion, of all those whom I have the honour to see around me, more qualified than he is to fill thpr,.-whether I regard the unif orm consis tency of his Tscareietrihaiacter—his amiable manners--his long Parliamesttr e tlar his profound legal knowledge, comblAnu t as .110,14 m ood . temper w i th a clear head, as evitilefin man/ la end trying debates, professing, too, the greataciplse• o leform Bill—with such opinions en ter I flattetysolf that a Ai . entlemen that I have now the honour to address whp. • • •orted the Reform Bill, or who on tlii• hustings ay. ••, • • themselves supporters of it, not orfri in letter, hut' irr - spirit, I hope that all such will support ; Pr motion with which I shall conclude, viz., to pizt,...ita.`tsaid before, into the first station to which a Commoner can aspire, the representative of the greatest assembly in the universe, the Right Hon. James Abercromby. The Right Hon. Gentleman sat down amidst loud cheering. Mr. ORDE then rose to second the nomination which had be en made. He said, it is with great reluctance that I now trespass upon the time of the House, but I trust that the oc casion will be my apology.—( Cheers.) I feel a deeper de gree of regret when I have to oppose the election of a gentle man whose public services I must acknowledge.—( Great cheer ing.) lam as willing as any one to acknowledge those services, but I think that this is an occasion when private opinion must give way to public duty. The choice of a Speaker is not a mere local question, as the Noble. Lord has said. The question is one looked at by all persons, not only of this country, but of others—it is not looked at as a question of a personal nature, but very justly as the proof of what the Parliament really is.—( Cheers.) The question most frequently asked is, If the Right Hon. Gentleman was fitted to fill the situation of Speaker in the last Parliament„ why is he not now—what has rendered him unfit to preside over the present one ? Into those questions I will not follow the Noble Lord—they have been disposed of by my Honour able Friend, who has proposed the Amendment.—( Cheers. ) The only answer to that I can give is, that the times have changed—( Cheers)—the times and circumstances have totally changed since the election of the Right Hon. Gentleman. It was generally understood then, that the Right Hon. Gentleman had retired; he had had his retiring pension fixed—( Cheers) —so that there can be no parallel drawn between the present circumstances and those which actuated the Members of the last Parliament. Then, the question was not a test of the state of political parties, as it is now.—( Great cheering.) The whole country now looks at the present ques tion as one which will decide the question to which their whole attention is directed.—( Cheers.) His Majesty, who was advised to appeal to the sense of the people and the country, will be very much dissatisfied if the reply to that appeal should be—the very first vote of this House is to place in the Chair one whose opinions are not in accordance with the opinions of of the great majority of the House. lam obliged to oppose the election of the late Speaker on these grounds—be would not be the representative of the House—would not be the real organ of the House. My lion. Friend, whose nomination I am about to second, has this qualification, that he will in reality be the organ of the House, his opinions being in ac cordance with those of the majority of the House.—( Great cheering.) His election will be received by the country as the triumph, not of a party, but of a great public principle. (Great cheering.) Such are the grounds upon which I sup port the nomination of the Right Hon. Member for Edinburgh to fill the Chair of this House. It is with great pleasure that I second the nomination of the Right Hon. James Abercromby to the Chair of this House : —( Great cheering : ). Sir C. M. SUTTON then rose.—He said he was aware that he owed an apology—an excuse to the House—for in truding himself upon them. He was so circumstanced that the House, after hearing what he had to say, must form their own judgment. He would not, for he could not, say one word in disparagement of the qualifications of the Right Honourable Gentleman, the Member for the city of Edinburgh. He had waited writhing under all the charges that had been heaped upon him. Knowing that the proper place to give an answer to the charges was the floor of that House—( Cheers)—lie trusted the House would hear him, for he would speak without any asperity.—( Hear.) The charge against me in the abstract is, that being Speaker, I bu sied myself in other matters ; that I assisted in the forma tion of the present Ministry, and counselled and advised the dissolution of the late Government. —( Hear, hear.) Now, these were the three points affecting my public character, and peculiarly affecting it as the Speakr of this House, who, to a certain extent, must be indebted to the existing Govern ment, and would, therefore, be guilty of lending a hand to the extinction of that body which had given him the proud pre-eminence which he filled. Now to all, to each one, and to every one of these charges, I reply, there is not one word of truth from beginning to end.—( Loud cheers.) Sir, with respect to my having been mixed up with other matters, allow me to explain that as soon after the prorogation of the last Parliament as the remaining public business which re mained to be disposed of would allow me, I went into the country with my family ; and it will be remembered that at that time his Majesty was also at Brighton. But I remained there without any communication, directly or indirectly, with any member of the Government until I was called back to London, by express. upon the occasion of the lamentable fire which hap pened.—( Hear.) I came to London as quickly as possible, and, after witnessing the devastation which had occerred,-it was suggested to me, and I instantly adopted the suggestion, that it was my duty to acquaint his Majesty of it. With the permission of the House, I will state the terms in which I wrote to the King : The Speaker feels it his duty to acquaint his Majesty, that having heard at Brighton early this morning that the two Houses of Parliament, and the house in which, by his gracious Majesty's permission, he lived, were on fire, he lost no time in coming up to London, and the Speaker regrets to state that both Houses of Parliament are entirely destroyed, nothing being left standing but the walls. A portion of the Speaker's house is also consumed, and the domestic part entirely destroyed. Some of the public offices have also suffered the same fate, and others have been much damaged ; but most of the public papers therein deposited have been saved. The Speaker regrets to add that Wesmin ster Hall was also in imminent danger, and was injured in several parts. The Speaker trusts his Majesty will pardon the liberty he has taken in forwarding this communication." Sir, having written this letter, I carried it myself to the Secretary of State for the Home Department. I saw the Under-Secretary. The Principal Secretary being at that time out of town, I told him I had written this letter to his Ma jesty, and requested him to send it by a special messenger to the King, and to acquaint Lord Melbourne with the objects of my letter and my visit. In the course of that evening I received a letter informing me that his Majesty had arrived in town, and desired my attendance at St. James's Palace. At two o'clock I received another letter desiring to see me before the morning. I also received a letter, stating that his Majesty had received my report, and inclosing ano ther letter, in which his Majesty made some suggestions as t 9 the mode of accommodating the Parliament. I went and saw Ls rd Melbourne, and told him I had received an answer to my letter ; and informed him of the contents; and I also particularly requested him to observe the object I had in view. I had received a letisz from Lord Melbourne, requesting to see me. I never missed a single day's attendance, and I was a party to the Report emanating from the Privy Council, relative to the destruction of the two Houses. At the next meeting I attended, I inquired if his Majesty had any com mands for me, and I was informed that his Majesty had not expressed anything of the kind. On the day following I re ceived a letter from Sir IL Taylor, stating that his Majesty had commanded me to go down to Windsor, and be there at five o'clock. I had a long audience with his Majesty, and at its conclusion I requested his Majesty's permission to communicate to Lord Melbourne every thing that had occurred.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") I did not request permission to state it to this House, and therefore I do not feel myself at liberty;to do so.—( - Hear.) But I refer to Lord Melbourne, to the Right Hon. Gentleman himself, and to the Noble Lord who presided over the Woods and Forests for the truth of this statement. I returned on Saturday from Windsor, and his Majesty proceeded to Brighton. Whet, I returned to London, I sheaved to the Right Hon. Gentle man that I had his Majesty's commands to wait upon him, and to make a survey of the ruins and gardens of the late Houses ; and the Right Hon. Gentleman will recollect that I went over the houses and gardens, and the report was then drawn up. But before that report was forwarded by me to his Majesty, I submitted it to Lord Melbourne and to the Right Hon. Gen tleman, and then I despatched it. Subsequent to that the late Ministry was dissolved, and I now declare that I had no anti cipation that such an event was near at hand, and that the first intimation I received of it was an article which I read in the morning papers.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.") The next charge which I have seen brought against me was, that I had busied myself in the formation of a new adminis tration, and the only overt act which is alleged against me, is that I attended the Privy Council Meetings. I did attend them, and the first was on the Monday following the resigna tion of the late Ministry. I attended his Majesty at St. James's, and I there saw many members of the late Govern ment. They had audiences of his Majesty—so had I—( Hear, hear)—and a message was also delivered, that all those in the outer room who were privy Councillors, should conic into the inner room, and sit at the Council Board. These were the cirumstances under which I attended. I was merely then by sufferance in my official capacity as Privy Councillor. The other meetings I attended from having received the ordinary printed circulars sent to the Members. It would be difficult, and I may add improper, to state what occurred at those meet ings, or to enter into minute details of the business transacted at those meetings; and I believe such a statement would not be consistent with the oath of a Privy Councillor ' • but there are many gentlemen present who are Members of the Privy Council—its votes are open to them, and it will be sufficient to state to the House that on any of the occasions when I attended nothing was transacted but business of the most formal nature.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear, hear.") When my Right Hon. Friend Sir Robert Peel returned, and took upon himself the station which he now occupies, he did me the honour to send for me to his house. It was upon an occasion when I was requested to attend a Privy Council, which had nothing whatever political in its object—it was for the purpose of getting the sanction of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to make good the payments of the Exchequer, and to fix the salaries. With these two exceptions, from the time of Sir Robert Peel's return up to this time, I haVe never attended a Cabinet Council at his house.—(Cheers from the Ministerial benches.) I will not go further with this subject. But when I hear of constant visits and communications with the Home-office before my Right Hon. Friend (Peel) re turned, and of my being continually with the Duke of Wel lington, I think I am bound to say that there is not one word of truth in it Cheers.) It would be perfectly immate rial if it were true. I would have felt it an honour if I were justified in calling so frequently as I was reported to have called. But I should consider it an act of impertinence, having no bu siness to transact there, if I were to call as has been stated. I never did so, and all I will say to the charge is, that it is totally false.--( Cheers.) Now, with respect to the forma tion of the present Ministry, I will boldly say, that with the exception of my Right Hon. Friend Sir R. Peel, the Lord Chancellor, and the Duke of Wellington, I never have ad vised, never suggested, never counselled, and never knew of the appointment of any one individual, till it had taken place. —( Great cheering from the Ministerial benches.) So much for that charge. I will now come to this—namely, the dissolution of the last Parliament.--( Hear, hear,) It has been said that I assisted at the Council where that measure was resolved upon. It is not true.—( Great cheering.) I never did advise, never did counsel, never was consulted, and never had anything to do with the dissolution of the last Par liament. So little did I know of it, that it was by accident, purely by accident, that I became acquainted with it. I knew nothing of the fact till it was announced in the Gazette.— THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1835. (Cheers. I will only mention this further circumstance, and the fact will occur to the minds of all the Gentlemen here, that if I were so confident that Parliament would be dissolved, why did I not take those steps that were taken by others—why did I not address my constituency in the pros pect of a dissolution—why did I not beg for their favour ? The fact was that I have had no communication whatever upon the subject, nor did I have any with my constituents until I ceased to be Speaker of that House. When I did so cease, I then certainly had communications on the subject. I am now again a candidate for the high office I for merly held, but with respect to my having had any communication with any human being, at any time, or upon any occasion, with reference to the late dissolution of the last Go vernment, or that there is anything from which to infer that I had anything to do, or that I delivered a single opinion re specting the dissolution of the last Parliament. I will say that to each and to all I will give, with the utmost solemnity, the strongest denial that can be given. I will declare — before this House—that, from the beginning to the end, it is wholly, ard utterly false.—(Great cheering. ) I have felt it but respectful to the House to state this. As I said before. I have long been the servant of the House of Commons and their chief officer, and there is no disgrace which I should feel so heavy, as upon the present occasion to be discredited by this House.—( Loud cheers.) With respect to who is the best person to fill the office of Chairman, I am sure that the House will concur with me, and I mean no disparagement to my Right Honourable Friend ( Mr. Abercromby) in saying so, that at the present moment, from peculiar circumstances, it will require great experience, and great knowledge of the business of the House, in order to discharge the duties of Chairman. Whether lam elected or not falls to nothing, when compared to this. I have the highest respect for the Right honourable and Learned Gentleman who has been proposed in opposition to me, and I hope he will believe that I speak with perfect sincerity when I say that no rnarm rates his talents higher than I do, and I feel that it is no disparagement to him to say that even he would feel great difficulties in filling the char of this House. I will now conclude ;* but before I sit down, perhaps the House will permit me to express a wish— it is the one uppermost in my mind—that whatever may he the determination of the House upon the present occasion, they may form a sound judgment in electing him as their Speaker who will discharge his duties most usefully to the country, most acceptably to the House, and most satisfactory to the public at large. The Right Hon. Gentleman concluded amidst very loud cheers. Mr. ABERCROMBY then rose and was received with most enthusiastic cheers. From the situation in which the Right Hon. Gentleman stood, and from the low tone in which he spoke, it was almost impossible to catch a single whole sen tence of what he stated. We, however, understood the Right Hon. Gentleman to say that he had yielded to the sug gestions of his friends, and not by any desire of his own, in standing forward, as a candidate for the high office of Speaker of that House. The House was now about to perform its first and one of its most important duties.—( Loud cheers.) He had always considered the selection of the individual who was to fill the highest place in that House was one of its most paramount duties.—( Cheers.) lie would say nothing at the present moment with reference to the fitness of the Right Hon. Gentleman or himself to fill that high office, but would leave that point to be decided by tia judgment of those who were much more competent judges than himself.—( Cheers. ) The Right lion. Gentleman opposite, no doubt, as he thought properly and most honourably, had entered into explanations of his conduct with reference to what had taken place not within, but without the walls of that House. It must be known to all present that the contest out of the House had been conducted in a very different manner to that in which it would be carried on in it.—(Great cheerine.) He would not advert now to what had taken place elsewhere, because, unless he was very much deceived, many days would not pass before a motion would be brought be fore the House, which would have the effect of deciding the particular question which had been so much *the subject of conversation out of doors.---( Loud cheers.) Whatever opinion he had entertained upon different subjects, whether right or wrong he would not pretend to say, had been adopted by bine because he believed them to be the best. He did not think it necessary to trouble the 1 -louse .further, as he was firmly convinced its decision would be such as would give weight and dignity to itself, and insure all its rights and pri vileges, and secure the conducting of its business with order and regularity, which was essential to the comfort, honour, confidence of the people—( Cheers. ) Lord STANLEY then rose amidst great cheering and ad dressed the House as follows—Sir, as I conceive it is not pro bable that any other gentleman will be submitted to the con deration of the House other than those that have already been laid before it, I hope I shall not be considered as impertinently intruding myself on the attention of the House, when I con fess that I feel anxious to take this opportunity of stating the grounds for the vote which it is my intention to give on the present occasion.—( Cheers.) In doing so, lam anxious, in a question which partakes in some degree of personal and po litical consideration, to state my views without offence to either of the two gentlemen who have been put in nomination, for both of whom I entertain personal respect—(Cheers)—and from whom I have received during the existence of the late government, great and 'important assistance.—( Cheers.) I had the honour to form part of that Government —an honour I shall ever feel in having for four years been a member of that Administration. I yield to no Member in my attachment to that which has been put forward as the great principle involved in this question—_l mean the principle of Reform. I yield to no Member of that or any other Government in my attachment to liberal principles. I will venture to say, lam second to none in the zeal with which I endeavoured to support it. But in 1833, although I did not express my sentiments on that oc casion, I conveyed most fully my praises to those which were everywhere bestowed by every side of the House on the talents, integrity, and impartiality of my lien. friend—that no difference of public opinion were sufficient to counterbalance his inestimable services.—( Loud cheers.) I was of that opi nion then, lam of that opinion now. But when I came down to the House, I must confess I did expect to hear a declare • don of the differences of circumstances under which their opinions had changed.—(Cheers.) I came down with com munications from neither one side nor the other, founded on nothing but the public prints, and wherein I was informed that disclosures were to be made that would call on the House as a matter of honour, to do an act of justice to itself in not sub mitting to an intriguer as the President of their assembly. Now, Sir, what has been done ? My lion. Friend who pro posed the Right Honourable Gentleman, and no man enter tains a higher respect for talent and consistency than I do, says not one weld on the subject ; but that, on the contrary, my Right Honourable Friend ( Sir Chs.rlcs Manners Sutton) stood as high in the estimation of the country as he ever stood before. But he says that a great public principle is involved here. My Hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle, who fol lowed in the same course, explained a little more what that general principle was, which I confess, in my own mind, had bean left in doubt.----( Hear, hear.) He had declared that no public charges were made on his public conduct, but that, moreover, if public charges had been made else where, that the House of Commons could not take cogni zance of them ; that if they had been made, the House was not to take advantage of them. The Right Hon. Gentle man was, he was convinced, from what had fallen from him, not satisfied with his position ; he had felt that in that po sition in which his friends desired to place him, he ought not only to be unconvicted, but unsuspected. I agree with him, my Right Honourable . Friend has met the charges boldly—be has met them freely—he has met them unanswered—without an intention of their being an swered ; and I say, then, on these grounds the House of Commons cannot degrade the Right lion. Gentleman from the situation in which he now stan-ls.—( Great cheering.) I come then to the public principle which is involved in this question. What is there that this House cannot give the go-by in this as you did on a former occasion ? The person whom you select to be your Speaker should, they contend, be known to entertain opinions in conformity with the majo rity of that House. Is that a new principle ? • Was not that proposition met by Lord Grey's Administration ? The declaration says that that was not a proposition of public principle ; but if this be a great public principle, surely that which we gave the go-by in 1833 was of infinitely greater importance ; but I ask the House—l do not question the consis tency of those gentlemen who held that opinion in 1833—but I ask whether in following up those opinions in 1833 a complete refutation was not given to such a principle:? But, Sir, in 1833 they say there was no question upon which there had been a direct appeal to the country. Let the country look to 1831, in which an appeal was agitated, and in which a great principle was involved—l allude to the Corn Bill. Was there ever a question on which this principle was brought forward ? And what was the first act of that Parliament but to elect a Speaker whom they knew to entertain opinions different from the administration and the majority of the House ?—(llear. ) I might inquire of the Right Hon. Gentleman who proposed Mr. Abercromby, in what respect the circumstances of 1833 and 1835 have so far differed, that we should elect a different Speaker ? But I have pointed out to him,' that in one re spect at least the circumstances of the present times are not stronger—they are not so strong, with regard to the question of the Speaker, in the general proposal of the House. Those principles being put to issue, as they were in 1833, what are the different circumstances ? I ask again and again, and I know not what those circumstances are, except I am to take the doctrine of the Honourable Gentleman, the seconder of Mr. Abercromby, and that doctrine is, that this is not a test of principle, but a test of the strength of party.—( Cheers from the Ministerial benches, reiterated by the Opposition.) We are told it is essential to the Crown that no mistake should exist as to the sentiments of the House ; that no mistake in 1833 could have been entertained--that no mistake in 1831 could have been entertained, because upon both these occasions the Hon. Gentleman asserted that the Government *—wielding the whole power of the Government, in proposing a Speaker, must consent to such a sacrifice as the expediency of time moment required. If it were a great public principle, no expediency, nothing on earth ought to have allowed a Government to have acted so. But the Hon. Gentl eman says circumstances have now materially changed. They are changed in one respect certainly, that we were in office in 1833, and that we are not in office in 1835.—(Laughter, and cheers.) I really don't mean to say this invidiously. Hon. Gentlemen may perhaps not believe me when I say I speak in all sincerity, and I use the words of one of the Hon. Gentle men who proposed Mr. Abercromby. The difference be tween the cases of 1833 and 1835 has been stated by him te be, that in one case a Speaker was proposed by those who wielded the controul of the Government, haeieg a certain majority in their favour, and that in the pre_ instance the majority may be less, and that therefore it is es sential we should take this opportunity of signifying to the Crown that we have no confidence in the A,dmini , tration.— ( Hear, hear, hear.) Is this the principle ?—( Hear, hear, hear.) Well then, if it is, I say that an act of grosser in justice---(Great cheering from the Ministerial benches.)-- an act savouring more of resentment than of justice—never could be perpetrated, than taking a decision of that point upon a question materially affecting the honor and the character of the House itself.--( Cheers from the ministerial benches.) I say, Sir, if it be the intention to try the strength of parties, let that question be manfully brought to issue upon an add-ess for the removal of the Ministers.--( Hear, hear.) But I say, do not on the one hand endanger and damage the character (Cries of " No, no," and " Hear, hear," from the Ministerial benches)—l say, do not commit such an injustice—( Loud cries of " No, no,")—and I appeal to the honour and the candour of Gentlemen in this House, when I ask them if it be not an injustice—( Hear, hear ; and continued cries of " No, no")—to remove a Speaker against whom you have not only admitted that there is no present charge, but whom you have even admitted to be pre-eminently qualified for the situation—if it be not an injustice to remove him, for the purpose of ascertaining the strength of parties.— ( Cheers, and " No, no.") But we are told that by the election of a Speaker this day we are to judge of the strength of parties. If the decision of this question is to be taken as an indication of the opinions of the House—if the sentiments of the Speaker should be in accordance with those of the majority of the Mem bers of this House, will the gentlemen who support the Hon. the Alember for Edinburgh take upon them to declare that his principles are their principles— (Cheers from the Ministerial side)—that his politics are their politics, and that by his public declarations they are prepared to be bound ?—( Continued cheering.) I k now th a t th e H on . M em b e r f o r East Surrey ( Majorßeauclerk) will not venture to make such a statement. I know that he has long been a supporter of the Whig party, and will not be held bound by the opinions of the Right Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Abercromby.) But if my support should be taken as an indication that I concur in the opinions of either of the Right Hon. Gentlemen, I must say, that I widely differ from them both, but especially in the case of the Right Hon. the Member for Edinburgh, I see grounds for refusing him my support. On many questions lam opposed to him. The Right Hon. Gen tleman is for shortening the duration of Parliament—if he does not actually advocate triennial Parliaments. He sup ports, and lam opposed to, Vote by Ballot. lam against the voluntary principle of supporting the Church, although not possessed of so much experience on that subject as the Right Hon. Gentleman. I have thus stated how far I differ from him on these important questions, and therefore am I to be told that by supporting his nomination to the Chair, I have adopted all his political views ?—( Loud cries of " No, no ! " from the Oposition.) Why, if that be not the case, what becomes of the statement of Hon Gentlemen that the decision of this question will be the test of political strength.—( Cries of " No, no," from the Opposition. ) One of two alternatives must be adopted—either the decision must be taken as a test of political strength or not. Are the Gentlemen opposite, who support the Right Hon. Gentleman -are they all, 1 ask, prepared to adopt all his political senti ments? If not, then this decision cannot be regarded as a test of political strength. It would be impertinent of me to mention the name of any' gentleman as qualified to discharge with dignity and impartiality the arduous duties of Speaker of this House, but if feelings of delicacy did not pre vent me, I could lay before the House a man—who, from his knowledge, setting aside the experience of the Right Honourable Gentleman below me ( Sir C. M. Sutton) was preferable to any other with whom I am acquainted, and whose political opinions approached nearest to my own. I would select the Right Hon. Gentleman who represents the town of Cambridge ( Mr. Rice). If my vote is to be tc.ken 'as an indication that my opinions are in accordance with the po litical opinions of the gentleman whom I support, mine accord more with that Right Hon. Gentleman's, than with those of the Right Hon. Member for Edinburgh; but I disclaim the doctrine altogether. I neither agree with the political principles of the Right Hon. Gentleman below me ( Sir C. Sutton), or with those of the Member for Edinburgh, but I stand on the declaration which I made before—a declaration consistent with all my political sentiments and opinions, consistent also with all the arguments which have been heard from this side of the House, and not attempted to be refu,ed, that no case has been made out, which can induce this House to withdraw its support from the Right Hon. Gentleman who has for so many years filled the Chair. In conclusion, I have to repeat that it is on public grounds, and not from any agreement in political principles, I support the motion of the Noble Lord, the Member for Liverpool. Mr. ABERCROMBY explained that the charges alluded to rested not upon his assertions, but a report which prevailed out of doors, and originated with some other person.—( Cries of " Question." and " Divide.") Mr. FERGUSSON said—lt is with no inconsiderable degree of diffidence I rise to offer my sentiments on this im portant occasion. Very early perceiving that there would be a strong opposition and difference of opinion on this question, (though I did not consider it would be so important as it has become)—from a high respect for the impartiality of feel ing and judgment, I did certainly communicate to Sir C. M. Sutton, that I should vote for him, or at least not against him.—(" Question, question.") But the character of my present course, is now, however, very different. It is not now a question of character, but a great political question.—( Hear, hear.) On that principle I would have voted against my own brother, if he had been opposed to the principles I conceived advantageous to the public good ; but in the situation in which I was placed, I found that the voice ofthe Reformers throughout the country was loud and decided on the question. —(Hear hear.) Even my own constituents requested me to support the other Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Abercromby), and - appeals came upon me, so fast and forcible, to bring me to vote against Sir C. M. Sutton, that I was placed in a very difficult situation, and there is scarcely a gentleman in the north who does not think I shall vote against that Right Hon. gentlemen. lam sorry to say that Sir C. M. Sutton has placed his honour and character at stake upon this question.— (Cries of " No, no," and " Hear, hear.") I say it in the most friendly manner, that he has placed his character and honour at stake, and as he has left it to me to take my own course, I may declare that I believe his character and honour is not at stake.—( Hear, hear, hear.) But the question is inti mately connected with the great principle of Reform, and if I supposed his honour and character were at stake, I would be the last man to vote against him—( Hear, hear.) After what has been said, I have nothing more to add than that I shall so far maintain my promise as not to vote against him—( Hear; and loud cries of " Question.") Sir CHARLES M. SUTTON and Mr. FERGUSSON explained. Lord JOHN RUSSELL then rose, and was received with loud cheers. He said he could not trespass upon the time of the House, without explaining the grounds upon which he gave his vote upon the present occasion. Before going into the matter generally, he would say something relative to what had fallen from his Right Honourable Friend, Lord Stanley.) If his principles, as laid down by him that day, were carried out, then there was an end at once to the option of the House of Commons as to whom they should place in their chair. According to that doctrine, the House of Com mons were bound to re-elect the Right Hon. Gentleman, because he had come down and denied, most firmly, that he had any thing to do with counselling the dissolution of the late House—( Great cheering)--with being guiltless of intriguing for the dismissal of the late Ministry. The House had not met for the purpose of passing a vote of censure upon the Right Honourable Gentleman the late Speaker, but to exercise one of the most important acts they could be called upon to do, viz., the choosing of a gentleman to preside over their debates ; and it would not, it could not, for a moment be supposed that the House would cast dishonour on any one of the candidates, because they did not elect him— ( Cheers.) There was a precedent for the election he pro posed to the House. In the time of Lord North, Sir Fletcher Norton having done something to displease that Minister, and the Noble Lord having a majority in the House, proposed another gentleman as Speaker, making some com plimentary speech to the effect that he was too old a servant of the House and ought to be relieved from his duties—the Noble Lord carried his motion, but could it for a moment be supposed that the House intended by the vote to cast cen sure upon Sir F. Norton ? Much had been said as to the attendance of the late Speaker at the Privy Councils ; but it was a well known fact, that the summoning of the Councillors does not rest with the King, but with the Prime Minister for the time. The attendance in question took place when the Duke of Wellington was Prime Minister—(Cheers)--and it was a well known fact that none of the Councillors were summoned but those who were well known to hold opinions in in 'unison with the person who summoned.—( Cheers.) His feeling was that the Speaker .of the House of Commons had so mixed himself up in the late political world, that he had compromised the dignity of the character.—( Cheers. ) There is no doubt that if the Right Hon. Gentleman had pleaded to be excused, it would have been granted. At the time the Duke of Somerset was appointed Master of the Horse he no longer attendee the Privy Council meetings, and when the Earl of Albemarle held a similar situation he also declined attending them. If the Right Hon. Gent. had sig nified that such a proceeding would not be becoming in him, if he had intimated the slightent wish that he thought such a proceeding inconsistent with his public character, he would have been at once excused.—( Hear, hear.) The nue- _ ber of Privy Councillors is not so small t o re uire the attendance cf every indiy„ t - iiey __ amount in q all to two hundred, awl upwards, and it therefore cannot be necessary that the Speaker of the House of Commons should appear there against the known opinion —against what would have been the declared opinions of that House of Com mons.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") I think it can not be doubted that the Right Honourable Gentleman would hardly have done that, if we were in the middle of a Session of Parliament ; if it was, for instance, during the Easter recess, I fancy he would not have attended four or five Privy Councils, and be prepared to meet Par liament, and •ask for . their approbation for a provisional Ministry, consisting solely and entirely of the Duke of W e llington.—( Loud cheering.) With regard to the charge of degradation that has been made, I fancy that the Right Hon. Gentleman cannot view it in such a light, and there is nothing in the question that would make that gentleman retire from this House with mortified or painful feelings. I think the only point on which the question turns is with respect to the Right Honourable Gentleman's political bias. As the Hon. Member for Yorkshire' observed when proposing him on a former occasion, his political feelings did not remain inert, but got the better of him, and made him do acts which, as the Speaker of this House, he should have avoided. This would be a ground with me, I con fess, for having the election of Speaker pure; and it is one of my reasons for not choosing the Right Hon. Gentleman.— ( Hear, hear.) It has been urged that Lord Grey's Govern ment app roved of the Right H on . G ent l eman on two occa sions. With respect to the first of them, it was in the year 1811, when the Right Honou ra bl e G entleman still continued in the office of Speaker, and nothing cccurred to render hls removal necessary, to the end of the Session of 1832. On the other occasion the Right Honourable Gentleman did retire--he stated to the House that he had acted as Speaker for six Sessions, and he asked its permission to retire. I think that the Right Hon. Gentle man will admit, that I was not one of the most grudging of those who offered their tribute of approbation and praise to that Right Honourable Gentleman. ( Hear, hear.) I bore my testimony to his conduct, during the sitting of Parliament, and I believe that he behaved in the most ex emplary manner. If he had any party bias he did no: at tempt to shew it, nor was there that danger to be appre hended from its indulgence then when it was a weak party that might happen now. In 1832, the Right Honourable Gentleman having retired, and having obtained by Act of Parliament his retiring pension, he was elected Speaker the following session. I know not what the objects or feelings 'of those who proposed him were, but for my part I felt exceedingly solicitous far the character of the Reformed House of Parliament.—( Hear, hear.) There is no doubt, in point of intelligence, in point of honesty, and in point of integrity, it was far superior to any other House that had ever sat, but I did not feel sure that, having a great number of members who had not turned their attention to Parliamentary forms, there might not be some deficiency in those forms, which would become the subject of undeserved obloquy. From these grounds I departed from my views, which exactly were, that the Speaker should be the organ and representative of the House.—( Hear, hear..) I shall now turn to a question, which, I think, by far the most important, namely, how far public principle is ii.volved in our present choice. I think it is necessary to place in that chair a man who is zealous on behalf of the liberties of the people, zealous in behalf of popular prerogatives, to be the organ of this House with the Crown, to represent their feelings firmly, zealously, and without fear of offending, or a wish to conciliate those who may have the power of dispensing favours. This is the doctrine of the reformed House of Commons, which it is especially necessary to vindicate at the present moment. That Parliament which, I shall say, was as loyal towards the Crown as any Parliament that ever existed, was suddenly dis solved. It is the well-known prerogative of the Crown, and that prerogative was asserted ; but when the naked sword was drawn, it was necessary to have the shield and buckler of popular privileges.--(Great cheering.) I know of no right more sacred or less to be infringed, than that of this House placing its representative in the Chair. We have all been sent here by persons, not because they like our manners, but because they agree with us in our political senti ments, and because they think that we will reform abuses.— ( Cheers.) So I say. Let us, let all who wish to see reform of abuses, have a Speaker in this house to aid us in those reforms. This was the doctrine in ancient times, when the prerogative was also asserted, as in the time of Charles the Second, when an attempt was made to force upon the House of Commons a Speaker favourable to the Court. The attempt was resisted, and successfully resisted, and I will call the at tention of the House for a moment to the sentiments ex pressed by Sir Herbert Johnstone and Mr. Sergeant Williams upon that occasion. The sentiments of those eminent men were very different from those which I have heard to-day.— ( Cheers.) Sir H. Grimstone asked with indignation, " shall we not have the liberty of choosing our own servant to do our own work as we wish it done ?" And again, when he called upon " every man to consider the right of the people of England."—( Great cheering.) This is what I say on the present occasion. I also say, let every man here consider the rights of the Commons of England.—( Great cheering.) We have for our choice a man of the character I have mentioned, who, in addition to his legal and historical knowledge adds a sound knowledge of the Constitution and the principles of the liberty of the people ( Hear ) Let us give the country an earnest that we mean to set zealously about Reform—that we are not going to deceive the people by mock Reform—let us show that. with undoubted loyalty to the Crown, we are determined to main tain the privileges of the Commons.- --(Tremendous cheering.) Sir ROBERT PEEL then rose, and was received with loud cheers. He said—l will pursue the course generally adopted by every one who has addressed the House, namely, that of limiting- the discussion on the present occasion to the matter in question. I appear here as a witness to perfarm a task I feel to be wholly unnecessary, that of confirming, so far as my- testimony can, the accuracy of my Right Hon. Friend ( Sir C. M. Sutton.) As to what took place previous to my arrival in this country, I will say nothing*. I will speak only with regard to what I kno w myself.' In undertaking the duty assigned to me by his Majesty, or at least shortly after wards—l had an interview with my Right Honour able Friend, Sir Charles Manners Sutton, and informed him of the task I had undertaken, and of the principles upon which I was determined to proceed, namely, that I should seek for aid in the performance of that task from every man whom I thought could unite with me consistently with his honour. I asked him, respecting, as I did, his abilities and experience in public life, whether it was consistent with his feelings and sense of duty to enter into the service of the Crown ? ( Cheers.) Sir, I received from the Right Honourable Gentleman this answer, that he did not seek employment in an official capacity in the service of the Crown. There is a defect in that which I will supply, as probably that was the main reason which induced him at such a time to withhold his services from his Majesty : he stated I have served in the Chair for a period of 18 years, and I do feel that if I were now to enter - into the arena of discussion, I should, after so long a service, and my personal connec tion with the authority of that situation, I should run the risk of lowering it, if I appeared in the House of Commons as a member of the Government.— . (Cheers.). That was the. reason, Sir, my friend assigned to me for his willingness, nay, his desire, to withhold his ser vices upon that occasion.—( Cheers.) When I understood from my Right Honourable Friend that he was not willing upon that ground to enter into the services of the Crown as a Member of the House of Commons,-4earing that there might be something that might lower his authority if he became a member of the Government at a time when it was likely that there would be a stormy discussion, I did not feel it to be my duty to consult my Right Hon. Friend either as to the formation of the Government or its policy---( Great cheering)—and not one word passed between my Right Hon. Friend and myself upon the subject.—( Hear.) I then asked him whether he would wish again to fill the Chair of the House of Commons in case of a dissolution.—( Cheers.) My Right Honourable friend said, that he had no wish or feeling upon the subject, that it was a matter on which he could have no personal interest, from the liberality towards him of the House of Commons.—(Cheers..) At the same time he stated that the impediment of ill health which had led him, to meditate retirement no longer existed, and if I th o u g ht the public had claims on a continuation of his services, so long as health would permit him to exercise his duties, he would not withhold himself from the House of Commons. Such were the circumstances, and such the course pur sued by my Right Honourable Friend, and the question now is, whether, since he has been proposed, and professed his willingness to serve the office of Speaker, it is right and fitting that this House should select another ?—( Ch eers .) The Noble Lord opposite_says that we have a right to choose whom we please. I admit that proposition to the fullest extent. But I say that the Noble Lord who professes to be loudest in favour of the public good ought not to insist upon an abstract right • but ought to consider, in an instance lik e th e present, whether that right can be exercised with justice.—( Cheers.) The Noble Lord says that he would bring for'vvard precedents : in all his historical research he can only produce against the Reformed Parliament and r the Government of Lord Grey—( Hear, hear, hear)—the example of Lord North in the session when Sir Fletcher Norton—a worthy example truly—( Great cheering)—the great objection to Sir Fletcher Norton being a speech which he had made at the bar. The Noble Lord cited a case in question—that of Lord North ; that Lord North answered to this. Did Lord North, however, present a case parallel to this? Did not Lord North substitute that by reason of iil health ? Sir Fletcher Norton resigned the duties of the Chair —such was the case under Lord North's Administration. Lord North was so convinced that whatever might abstractedly be the right of exercising this privilege, he must be com pelled to invent some other pretence for not giving a true reason for why he did so. The Noble Lord also has another precedent. But if the Noble Lord has that prece dent, he must have concocted that precedent when he thought the change had arrived which rendered it imperative for a new Speaker to be elected.—( Hear, hear.) But I ask the Noble Lord whether this charge was not instituted against my Hon. Friend in the belief that he had been instrumental in instigating a dissolution of Parliament? The Noble Lord has cited another case, also that of Sir Edward Seymour, The House of Commons then elected a Speaker.—( Here an Hon. Member observed, " Against the wishes of the Crown.") Against—against 1 I care not who it would be against, though I ought to beg pardon for any apparent warmth which may be observable. My situation is far e:,„ onerous for me to set err example of warmth in the douse. The case which the Noble Lord has cited, is : 10 case at al l . The Crown wished to elect a Speaker, an^. . i iief was elected by the House in his stead ; but I ask the House and the Noble Lord, whether the case which has been add uce d h as any reference sne state of the circumstances at present, and : . ;ere 'not totally different from them ? Not in the least doubting your right, as far as the office is concerned— but is it just, or is it fair towards the individual, looking at it in a sense of common justice and common fairness, that the .Right Hon. Gentleman who has received that election during six successive Parliaments —against whom no charge has been brought—whose health permits him to exercise its most arduous duties and who, without one motive-of personal interest to gratify has consented to undertake the performance of its labours? The question then resolves itself whether you will permit a speaker to suffer by six weeks of uncontradicted calumny against him ? (Cheers.) I say never contradicted by himself on authority, and which calumnies have aroused the feelings of indignation which have been displayed throughout the House.— ( Hear, hear.) Now, Sir, I again repeat, may I ask the Noble Lord, and I am sure the candour of the Noble Lord will instantly avow it, whether this change was not instituted from the supposition that my Right Hon. Friend had been instru mental in promoting a dissolution of Parliament ? Several voices—" No doubt." Lord JOHN RUSSELL--My impression extended no further than that he attended in the formation of that Go vernment, which, from its position, could do no otherwise. My grounds of objection were certainly founded on the sup position that he had been a party to that advice by which the late Parliament was dissolved. Sir R. PEEL resumed.—lf this was their impression, I hope the Members of this House will have the manliness to keep to their terms of opposition, but if they had determined to oppose on most other grounds, I have that confidence in their honour that they will relinquish their opposition.— ( Hear, hear.) What are the arguments which have been used in favour of the other side of the question ? One Honourable gentleman says that the Speaker should always represent the majority of the House. Is that a princi ple which ought to be established?—( No, no.) Is it wise that a Speaker should be seeking favour with a majority of the House of Commons, to secure his election ?—( Hear, hear. Is it not infinitely wiser to look at his qualifications for office rather than to look at his political opinions ? But that question was decided by the first Reformed Parham , tit. Lord GreY and his adherents having a great majority, th ught it right to elect the Right Hon. Gentleman whom the same party new oppose. You had the power, then, to enforce your opi nions, for you then had a majority, and why did you derart from the principle you now lay down ? The first decision of the Reformed Parliament carrhs this conclusion, that the House did not feel itself called upon to elect a Speaker whose opinions were in accordance with the majority of the House.—( Hear, hear, hear.) The Noble 14. rd says "we wanted to avail ourselves of the ad- vantages of the Right Honourable Gentleman's character, abilities and experience, and therefore we elected him. But that man has served us ; he has done his work ; he has an- swered our object; and, with signal ingratitude, I must say, —(Loud and repeated cheering)--we will now dismiss him, after we had established the principle or electing a S,,eaker not of our own opinions, when we had: the power to reject him. After we have availed ourselves of his ser vices, and after he has co-operated with us in estab!ish ing the eharLter of the first reformed Parliament for decorum, we will unfairly take the very first opportunity to subject him to disgrace."—( Cries of " No, no.") No, no, indeed ; for no disgrace can be heaped upon a man who has done his duty. It is beyond the reach of a majority to do that; but it is not beyond the reach of a majority to injure the character of the House.—( Hear, hear.) The Honour able Gentleman who seconded the motion with so much ability and candour, has remarked that it is of great im portance, as there i 3 a probability of two or three stormy debates likely to arise in reference to the present Government , and the dismissal of the last, that we should have an impartial Speaker. Look then who has he proposed ?—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") I took down the words—" It is of importance to have an impartial mediator to still the raping storm which may be raised by the conflicts which are likely to ensue between exasperated parties." And whom have you selected? One who was a distinguished member of the very government whose principles and removal are to come under discussion. If impartiality is the object, select whom you please, but certainly not one of those whose conduct is to be canvassed.—( Hear.) There are two candidates ; one who has served the office eighteen years during seven parlia ments, and who declined office on the ground that he thought it would have a tendency to lower the authority of the Chair. The other candidate is a member of the late Government, of whom I will not utter one word of disrespect, but of whose impartiality we have had no opportunity to judge in this House. Can you doubt cf the preference you ought to give to either ? The House has a most important duty to pei form, and should be as careful not to do injustice to any individual, as not to lessen its own character and influence. I shall resist the motion, then, of the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Denison) on individual and personal grounds; and as this is the only office which the House has the power of conferring, let us avail ourselves in the selection we may make of the example which reformed and unreformed Parliaments hal'e afforded us. The only objection made to the appointment of the Right Hon. Gentleman ( Sir C. Sutton) is that he at tended certain Councils which were instrumental in dismissing the old Government and in forming a new one. All the testimonies that have been given of kis tried impartiality and his abilities remain quite unimpeached. But if be is to be blamed for acting in the capacity of a Privy Council lor, the House should make a rule disqualifying him for that office. A great mistake pervades the public mind as to the duties of a Privy Councillor; it consists not merely of the members of Government ; others besides are called on to attend the Council. No advice is given in it. But if the Speaker is in town when a Privy Council is convened, and his advice is asked, what right has he to r fuse such advice ? It is erroneous, however, to say that the Right Hon. Gentleman contributed to the formation of the present Government, on the dis missal of the former one. I shall vote for the Hon. Gentleman , because I think that the precincts of the chair of this House ought not to be invaded to try the strength of political parties. —( Hear, hear.) I shell resist the motion to appoint the Right Hon. Member for Edinburgh, on the ground that the Member for the University of Cambridge posseses superior qualifications from his long practice in the duties of Speaker, and because his rejection, for the reasons advanced against his appointment would tend to disparage as well the character of the office of Speaker as of the House of Commons itself. The Right Hon. Baronet sat down, and was loudly cheered for some minutes. Mr. COBBETT rose amidst loud cries of " Question , question." The Hon. Member stated that the last he had heard of his constituents was, an Address to his Majesty, thanking him for having dismissed the late Ministers. (Laughter.) He would do nothing which had a tendency to bring them back again. There were a great many reasons why he would not ♦ote for Mr. Abercromby, and one was, that the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh, for whom, personally, lie had great respect, was one of those who clandestinely pushed for ward and carried the inhuman Poor Law Bill.—(Laughter.) Lord MORPET Ifthen rose, amidst loud cries of Qua. tion, question." He said he would limit his observa tions to what seemed to him to be peculiar to his own ,1 position.--( Hear, hear, hear.) His Noble Friend who had ',, opened the discussion of t o -d a y so a bl y h a d rem i n d e d the :-' House that at the election o f th e Sp ea k er o f t h e l ast P a r- ',V' • liament, he (Lo r d M.) h a d h a d t h e distinguished' ' honour of proposing the successful candidate for that high &I' pointment ; and true it was, that he rested his recommendation of the appointment of Sir Charles Manners Sutton on his eminent fitness for the distharge of the duties and digi ties of his office. —( Hear, hear.) Not one syllable-of what he had then stated did he now repent or retract. On the, contrary, if the opponents of Sir Charles M. Sutton should fail in their object, they would at least- have the compensa tion of yielding to no unworthy foe, and of knowing that the high functions of that office would be entrusted to a skilful guardianship. His limited task at the present moment was merely to claim for himself as full a share of even and strict literal consistency as could be assumed by any other Member; for, g's upon looking a t th e f u ll est recor d s o f the i r proceed i ng he found that in the very act of proposing the Right Una; Gentleman, before he came to any mention of his name he used this expression, and he should certainly state what that was, be cause when his Noble Friend had paid him the compliment of quoting some expressions of his, he did not happen to include this. He had stated that, in approaching the object for w hich he had risen, he had felt that it was due' to himself to men tion, and he was sure the person whom he was about to p r opose for the choice of the House, would be the last to complain of it—that there were circumstances which, at one time, in duced him to contemplate a different arrangement ; b u t that° circumstances to which he had but slightly alluded had not arisen. Those circumstances, as were known to many, hari net arisen in consequence of the absence from his place o f the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Edinburgh. The estimate he then held of Sir C. Sutton, and the respect for the abilities—the character and the career oftthis Right Bee' Friend—remained the same.—( Loud cheers. I Lord DUDLEY STUART arose amidst the loudest cries of" Question, question," " Divide, divide," and said that he should certainly vote for Sir Charles Manners Sutton, because , however painful it might be to him to vote in opposition to those with whom he usually acted, he considered that nothing had been stated that could justify any man in supposing that Sir Charles Manners Sutton had forfeited the confidence of the House. There was then a constant cry of " Divide, divide," amid° which Mr. ROBINSON rose and said, they would be doing 1112 act of injustice to the Right Hon. Gentleman—(" No, no")- HO (leaned that it was a question of public principle ;—if the chair were vacant, he knew no gentleman for whom he would vote with more pleasure, than the Hon. Member for Edinlyargb; The speaker was interrupted by loud cries of " Divide ) ," an u " Withdraw," which were kept up without intermis , ;ion after he sat down. Sir R. PEEL said a few words, but not one was heard. The House then divided, when there appeared— ' For Mr. Abereromby For Sir C. M. Sutton Majority for Mr. Abercromby lO The question was then put, and carried, that Mr. Aber cromby be elected Speaker. The announcement of the Numbers was rece i ved with 10ua cheers. These were heard without the House, and we re loudly responded to by the assembled multitude. On our return to the gallery we found Sir a. PEEL on his legs, who stated, amid much confusion' "chat after what had taken place, he felt bound to defer to thl expression of the opinion. of the House on that occasion, aD we understood the Right Hon. Baronet to add that it only remained for him to congratulate the Right Hon. Gentterns °. (Mr. Abercromby) on his election to the Chair. Mr. H LTME asked what course the Right Hon. Baronet intended to pursue with respect to the proceeding% o f the House for the next few days ? Sir R. PEEL said, that the House would F- 4 :4; each day, iD order that there might be sworn in a suffi:zient number Members to admit of his Majesty's speech, being received ° II Tuesday n The - House adjourned at half-past six o'clock. BIRTH. On the 18th inst., in G ower - street, B edford-square, the wi fe of William Porter, Esq., of a daughter. ' MARRIED. On the 18th inst., at Bromley Lodge, Captain Robert Patu ll° ' H.C.S. to Mary E rs ki ne , d aug h ter of the late Captain Rolla On the 18th inst., at Leamington Spa, the Rev. Edward Lew's of Llambeder, Breconshi re , t o Ch ar l otte Auriol, youngest daugh ter of the late Edward Auriol Ilay Drummond, D. D. , Dean of Boo' in., and brother of the late Earl of Kinnoull. On the 16th inst., at Hartburn Church, Northumberland, by th e a Rev. John Hodgson, M.R.S.L., having been previously Tna , F ic according to the rites o f th e R oman C at h o li c religion, Henry 1!.-").ne; tonnier Hawkins, E sq ., e ld est son of the late Anthony Montonnl_ Hawkins, Esq., M.D., o f U pper B rook-street, and of The Gae l, Monmouthshire, to Jane, only daughter of James Fenwicke, Esq" of Longwitton Hall, Northun.berland. DIED. On the 14th inst., in Brompton-square, aged 41, H. T. Bou Esq., eldest son of the Rev. G. Buniton, Rector of Oxenti ol "' Northamptonshire. On the 13th inst., Ellen, relict of John Whitley ; near Warrington. tisl y On the 18th inst., Mrs. Mary Francis, of the Terrace, Ken town, relict of J. Francis, Esq., in her 87th year. Rev. - On the 6th inst., at Alkham, in his 79th year, the te Smith, Rector of arlton, in Lincolnshire, and for 55 years Col ie and , Vicar of Alkham and Capel Le Ferne ; and sequestrator of t adjoining parish of Ewell, near Dover, in ,Kent. London : Printed and Published by MIPIDO YOUNG. of 112. Strand, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Striuld, in the COw' of Middlesex. Esq., of Ashtoo, At hi; ri,e Tstartue-t-t, HE S o d v a ! l °n ; t 4,,d i L, lie elwy : ' , wail k e s!Y, y e , 11' 1 °ale. • ^ .sell a Ja me `, ny et 8 ' k"Pbell, )1; 4e . A T r end t r y ir i e and, Tht coN, tia l , llf) T 4 l% Nry a V, Sal e(ln t 41 011 4 t w W EI s:_