Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-01-31 00:00:00

The bill was the same as that last:yeai,. founded oil the:
report of. the Select Committee.l-I‘=',i, 7(1 nehfithl.
Mr. Ayarox protested against a tither-al government
establishing a £lo franchise.
Protests against the bill were moved by other metro-
politan members.

TILE MAIL STEAM-PACRET SERVICE:

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the re-
appointment of the Select Committee to inquire into the
contracts, extending over periods of years, which have
from time to time been formed or modified by her Ma-
jesty's Government• with various steam-packet compa-
nies for the conveyance of mails by sea ; and likewise into
any agreementi or other arrangements which have been
adopted at the public charge, actual or prospective, for
the purposes of telegraphic communications beyond sea,
and to report their opinion thereon to the house, to-
gether with any recommendations as to rules to be
observed hereafter by the Government in making con-
tracts for services which have not yet beex sanctioned
by Parliament, or which extended over a series of years.
Sir J. PAKINGTON, pursuant to notice, called the
attention of the house to the manner in which the
enquiry intrusted to that committee in the last
session was conducted, and to the necessity that the
proceedings of our select committees should be
strictly limited to the matters referred to them by the
house. He objected to the party acrimony which had
been introduced into the proceedings of the committee,
and which ought. to have been especially avoided as
matters effecting personal charges. The proceedings
had further been inconsistent with the orders of refer-
ence, and the committees had no right to enter into the
question, or try the issues of political corruption. He
demanded that for the future the duties of the com-
mittee should be distinctly defined, and that it should
be precluded from entry into personal charges.

Sir F. BARING defended the conduct of the committee.
Lord J. MANNERS, as one of the committee, con-
sidered that the proceedings had been carried too far.
- Mr. B. OSBORNE objected to the constitution of the
committee, as composed of persons interested in the
inquiry.
Sir J. NORTHCOTE said that if members interested
had been excluded, those would have been kept out who
could best have brought out the facts of the case.
Lord LOVAINE objected to the political character of
the committee. _ _ .

Captain LEICESTER VERNON also, as a member of the
committee, thought that in mixing up political consi-
deration, it had departed from its line of duty.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that it was
scarcely fair that members of the committee, who had
been silent during its proceedings, should now come
down and complain to the house with regard to the
conduct of the committee. It was impossible for it to
pursue its inquiries without entering into personal
questions. They were appointed to inquire into the
conduct of the Government ; and how could they do so
without giving what might be called a political opinion.
He himself believed that the committee had acted in a
spirit of equity and fairness, and that it had not in any
way exceeded its powers.
Mr. WaLonounx said that the committee, of which
he was one, had acted as fairly as it could in a difficult
matter. .
The motion for the re-appointment of the committee
was then agreed to.