The Express.
London, England, 1855-08-25 00:00:00

LORD STANLEY ON THE BEST TIME FOR
HOLDING A PARLIAMENT.

--4,--
TO MI =MOO OP TIM =PRINS.

Sin.,—The class of a parliamentary session fur-
nishes the fittest opportunity for offering a few
suggestions as to the time of year when such sessions
ought to begin and end.
I have no sympathy with that very constitutional
school of politicians which thinks that the House of
Commons ought to sit all the year round, or nearly
so, as a check upon the Executive. On the contrary,
I believe that public interest, are on the whole very
sufficiently represented by the press during the usual
and necessary suspension of legislative bootees'. An
increase in the number or days during which parlia-
ment should sit would add little to the amount of work
done, and osrtainly would have no tendency to improve
the manner of doing it. The fatigue incident to a
nine or ten months' session would exclude many
members too conscientious to leave their duty unper-
formed, or half performed, and who, either from
other occupation or physical weakness, could not
devote the full amount of time and attention in that
case required. We err already in this country in the
way of demanding too much from the bodily strength
of public men, and in doing so 1060 some otherwise
available talent. I do not think that to advance
further in that direction would be recommended by
any reasonable person. Besides which, if ministers are
to have seats in parliament, and direct the proceedings
of the legislature in addition to the performance of their
own mote immediate functions of administration, a
recess of several months is indispensable, to prevent
one of two evils—either that of the work of public
offices falling hopelessly into arrear, or of its being
handed over, in reality though not in name, by the
responsible minister to the irresponsible clerk.
I assume, therefore, that there exists no general or
well-grounded desire to lengthen the session. To
shorten it, on the other hand, seems difficult, if not
impossible. I suggest neither course, but strept its
present duration—seven months on an average—as
that which custom and convenience sanction. The
question which I would raise is—Do we choose our
time of sitting so as to suit either the public conve-
nience or our own ?

England is, to the beet of my knowledge, the only
nation in the world whose most civilised inhabitants
pass their summer in towns and retire to winter in
the provinces. Every other community adopt. •
different arrangement. Nature and common nose
tell us to enjoy the pleasures of out-door life, of rural
residence, or of travel, at the time of year when days
are long, when the weather is warm, when trees and
flowers are in full beauty, and when the heated atmo-
sphere of a populous city becomes at onee unwhole-
some and disagreeable. On the other hand, frost,
snow, interrupted communications, long nights, and
short, gloomy days, naturally suggest sedentary and
social habits, the assemblage of friends and acquaint-
ances in a place where they may meet without trouble,
and the substitution of artificial enjoyments for those
which nature has ceased to afford us. A day of Lon-
don—l write as an M.P.—divided between clubs and
committees, debates and drawing-rooms, may be en-
joyed almost as much, and employed to as good pur-
pose, in November as in July. But no one, unless
his tastes be very decidedly and exclusively those of
a sportsman, will compare the pleasures of the coun-
try in January with those of the country in Jane.
The question is one chiefly of taste—it does not bear
much argument ; but if it were to be settled now for
the first time, apart from the influence of previous
custom. I believe that by three-fourths of the classes
affected, it would be decided in favour of the change
which I venture to suggest.
Briefly, what I propose is this,—That Par-
liament should meet regularly, as nearly as possible,
on the Ist of November ; that it should sit for
six weeks, adjourning about Dec. 16 for three weeks
or a month; that it should resume its sittings not
later than Jan.l6, by which two clear months would
have been gained at the time when our present
session usually commences, namely, the Ist of Febru-
ary. Deduct those two months from the other end
of the session, and parliament might be prorogued by
the first or second week in June, instead of the first
or second week in August.
I have treated this mainly as a matter of social
convenience; but it may be looked at in another light.
Of the jobs and blunders which escape the vigils:ice
of parliament, the great balk are perpetrated during
the last month or six weeks of the session,
when heat, weariness, and the attractions of
our brief summer have driven or drawn away all
exoept some seventy or eighty members, a clear
majority of whom are often official persons. That
this state of things is an abuse no one can doubt: it
is admitted on all hands. Ido not say that it can be
entirely remedied, for human energies will fail, and
human seal will flag, after a certain amount of con-
tinuous labour, at whatever season performed; bat
the attendance would be far larger, the excuse for
absence feebler, and business therefore better done,
if every M.P. had before him the certainty of release
before the middle of June. As matters stand, very
few constituencies will find serious fault with their
representative, especially if he be an old or middle-
aged man, because, on the plea of health, he has
"paired off" in July. Moreover, the intervention of
a month's holidays, as suggested, between the first
and mooed sets of the session, will give • longer in-
terval of rest than is now enjoyed. The Easter boll-
days, in the plan proposed, would remain undisturbed :
at Whitsuntide none would be necessary.
I may be told, "The subject is one which ought to
be left in the hands of Minister., party leaders, and
those who are entrusted with the management of
parliamentary business." To such a criticism I reply
that leaders of parties are precisely the last persons
who can venture to originate an alteration of this
hied. They cannot afford to provoke opposition, or
to lose support by throwing out ideas that may
chance to be unpopular among any of their political
friends. A question not in any large sense nationally
important, and not advantageous in a party point of
view, must be taken op by private end independent
members, if meant to be carried through at all.
I may be met with an objection to disturb the
universal and most laudable practice of family
gatherings at Christmas. Bat for these, ample leisure