The Sun.
London, England, 1852-05-07 00:00:00

came in, they resolved on adopting the other course of
consolidating by reference. He did not mean to say that
consolidation by reference was superior, or even equal,
to absolute consolidation; but to say that the word con-
solidation was used merely for the sake of form, and that
the Bill did not really consolidate, was a statement which
no Hon. Gentleman was justified in making.
Lord J. RUSSELL had heard the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman speak of consolidation by reference before, but
it was quite impossible to gather a meaning from it. If
they brought in a Bill that did not repeal the former
laws, it was obvious that all the parts of those laws
which were not inconsistent with the new Bill remained
in full force ; but it was clear that that was not consoli-
dation. If, after deliberation, the Government had de-
termined that it was not advisable to consolidate, their
proper course would have been to discharge the order as
it stood, have brought in another Bill simply to
" amend" the militia laws, and then to have followed
the course adopted by Sir Robert Peel in 1842, and al-
lowed every Member of the House to have a copy of
the Act which they intended should remain in force.
True, that would not have answered the purpose of
consolidation, but it would have afforded an explana-
tion of the actual nature of their measure.
Mr. WALPOLE believed that, in considering the
measure now under discussion, Hon. Members had
nothing further to do in order to understand its provi-
sions than to take the Act 42 George 111. as its
basis, and the Bill itself as the basis of the voluntary
principle.
Mr. COBDEN said the question which had been raised,
on that side of the House was, why Hon. Members had
not the details of the laws they were going to re-enact
laid before them. These Acts of Parliament were vir-
tually expired Acts.—(oh, oh, and no.) Why for 20
years they had been inoperative.—(No.) At all even"
they had been suspended during that period, and now
the proposition was to revive them. What he wanted,
therefore, was, that the House should see the provisions
which they were now called upon to re-enact. The
Noble Lord the Member for Tiverton (Lord Palmerston)
had certainly shown a degree of inconsistency upon this
question, which he (Mr. Cobden) had scarcely ever seen
exceeded in that House, and he had seen a great deal
of it there; but the Noble Lord might rest assured
that he should not be permitted to smuggle the Pratall"'
sions of the Act of 1802 through the House w
discussion,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, in allusion to Mr.
Cobden's statement that the Act 42d George HI. Was
inoperative, and therefore the same as if it did not
exist, reminded the Hon. Member that from time to time
Acts of Parliament had been passed suspending the bal-
lot under that Act, thus showing that it was an existing
law, and that the very last Act which did this was the,
14th and 15th of her Majesty's reign.—(Hear, hear.)
He contended that this was a very inconvenient mode of
raising the question submitted to the Committee, and,
moreover that it was not the proper stage of the 13'1:
upon which it ought to be raised. As to the statement
made by the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) that this was
not a consolidation Bill, he begged to say that long
before it came to the second reading, which involved
the question of principle, the House was fully informed
with regard to the character and decription of the Bill.
And he apprehended that, if it were the intention of the
House to admit a Bill which did not consolidate, a gaud
would be taken against the measure then. The ques-
tion now raised was virtually this, whether they were
to have a militia Bill or not. The objections of the
Noble Lord (J. Russell) were clearly intended to defeat
the Bill, notwithstanding the pledge he had given ono
former night. He (the Attorney-General) doubted if a
Bill which could emanate from the present Govern-
mentc woul satisfy the Noble Lord; indeed, if they had
taken up his own Bill, he questioned if the Noble Lord a
ingenuity would not have discovered some reason or
other for opposing it.—(Hear.) He hoped the Com-
mittee would not adopt the amendment of the Hon. MI;
her for Montrose. for it would virtually deprive them °` ;
Militia Bill, and leave the country "
without that defence
which a majority both in this House and out of
deemed to be absolutely nee( ssary.—(Cheers,)
Sir W. P. WOOD could not sit silent whilst the atten'
tion of the House was diverted, and purposely diverted,
from the details of the Bill, which ought now to be the
subject of their deliberations, to the consideration of the
personal conduct of his Noble Friend late at the head of
d
her Majesty's Government. That course was adopted
first by the Noble Lord the Member for Tiverton (Lord Palmerston), who, upon the introduction of his Noble,
Friend's Bill, and whilst professing to throw aside
considerations of party, directed the whole of his ad-
dress to prove that his Noble Friend had acted withinconsistency upon the question. The attack of l"e
Noble Viscount was then followed up by a Lord of the
Admiralty breaking, as be told the House, a twenty
years' silence—for what? Not to discuss the Militia Bill,
but, in his turn, to tell the Noble Lord again that
he was inconsistent. And to-night the attack on the
Noble Lord was continued by the Learned Attorney;
General. His main objection to bringing forward this 13111
at all was, that having waited now for two months sincethe resolution of the House on the subject was passed,
they had come to a period of the session when in reality
no practical results under the Bill could he obtained Pre-
vious to their assembling again in the autumn. It, then!
her Majesty's Government found they could not does!:
sufficient leisure to consolidate the laws relatingA
over
militia, let them permit the whole Bill to atop" But,
until they could undertake that necessary task-
independently of the consolidation of the other
i A 8 St;
they ought not to re-enact, ono latu, in the Yearele
all the provisions of an Act (the 42d of George .1-q
90) which was passed in 1802. For when they were re-
minded by the Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston) that th.
had alterations by steam in navigation, and inllrl es.
merits in other matters peculiar to modern °Pug
they should also remember that they had had varlet
improvements in the laws relating to soldiers.
Lord PAL IVIERSTON said that his Hon. and Learned_
Friend (Sir P. Wood) had made such pointed allusion !°
him that he must make one or two observations. -1101
Hon. and Learned Friend complained that he had not
comprehended any argument which be (Lord Pahne_.
ston) had used in favour of a militia force. He bad no
addressed himself to his Hon. and Learned Friend.
.oed
never preached to the converted; he took for grahlea
that his Hon. and Learned Friend, having supported tu
Noble Lord at the head of her Majesty's late Govern
o
ment in bringing in a Militia Bill at the beginning
the
the session, was fully and deeply impressed with t
absolute necessity—(Loud cheers)—of the imesedl
ctit
e
e,
organization of a militia force to provide for the ,r
fence of the kingdom, and therefore he was wholle
out of his (Lord Peimerston's) view in any argument
f
he had used for the purpose of showing the necessity °,
such a measure. But when his Hon. and Leaned Tries
a
found fault with him for having taxed with inconsis-
tency those who, like him, having supported a ,Mi:
litia Bill in the beginning of the session, had, w'uewheni
out of office, and when other parties had brought n
a Bill similar to their own, turned round upon those
parties, opposed their measure—and when his Hon. and
Learned Friend found fault with him on account of his re-
marks being insufficient and inadequate to convey hie
views, his only reply must be, humbly to refer his 110'
and Learned Friend to the Noble Lord the Chief C°111;
missioner of the Board of Works (Lord Seymour) all':
to the Right Hon. Gentleman the late First Lord oft b.;
Admiralty (Sir F. T. Baring), as the one by his ePeeFee
and the other by his vote had condemned the inceeet
tency of his Hon. and Learned Friend; and be had noa
doubt that a private conference—(Laughter)—with th9ed
two Right Hon. Gentlemen would convey to his lola
those impressions which his (Lord Palmerston's) speech
had failed to do.—(Cheers and laughter.)
Sir P. WOOD did not complain of the Noble Lord
not having converted him by his arguments on the Di"„,
but what he complained of was, that notwithstanding
the Noble Lord's (Lord John Russell) Bill was admitted
to be almost identical with that brought in by her Ma-
jesty's present Ministers, which the Noble Lord Bar
ported, the Noble Lord would not allow the Bill of the
late Prime Minister even to be brow ht in on the ground
'
that it required a total alteration before it was possibil
to obtain from it an efficient defence of the country, an'
yet the Noble Lord now assured them that he really
meant nothing at all.
Lord PALMERSTON had not said that the two Bills
wereidentical. But whether the Bills were identical or
not, his conduct would not be identical with that of the
late Government—he should not throw over a Bill which
ho thought to bo a necessary measure on account of a
mere verbal difference.
Mr. M'CULLAGU supported the amendment.
Mr. EWART rose amidst impatient and long•eaa
•
tinned cries of "Divide, divide."
Mr. HUME rose, as his Hon. Friend could not obtain
a hearing, and moved that the Chaireeten report P"geos;
in order that he might appeal to the Speaker whether _
not the business of the House could not be conducted its
a manner more satisfactory to the country?
Mr. EWART (amidst renewed cries of " Divide
again rose to support his Hon. Friend's motion, and
tap-
pealed to the Chairman if it was not possible to prose!'
order in the House. Hon. Gentlemen who were so 10,1,1
patient might apply to themselves the words of theballad—
c'
_ _ _

"I see a hand thou can'st not see,
Which beckons me away;
I hear a voice thou can'st not hear,
Which will not let me stay."

—(Oh, oh).
The CHAIRMAN put the question that he re 13,51
progress, and the gallery wa3 cleared for a division, 03:
none took place. On our return to the gallery, lv"
found

--;The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER address"
ing the Committee. He hoped they would not divide'
urethteliezin a
Gentleman must see that it Wt
impossible, w
ass
at times,
a rigid discipline, or
re p
rpopular
ea sisnedmi
sbelrye
ttioo
nn:a
oi nt. ttahl
moment which occasionally broke forth when the temper
of the House was ruffi,d. He was sure the lacusar
always pleased to hear the sensible remarks of the „-
Member for Dumfries (Mr. Ewart), from which 50
much information could be derived; and he had n°
doubt they would now hear the Hon. Gentleman.
Mr. HUME (amidst much noise and interruption)''
said if there was wanting any further reason whY
should press his motion, in order to report the state 0,
f
the House to the Speaker, it was that the leader n!
the House (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) 135°
had no more attention paid to him than any other Hon.
Member.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that was a very sigular observation of the lion. Gentle:
man. If, was difficult for one person to ascertain what
degree of attention was paid to what was going on bf
another. He remembered the Noble Lord (Lord •
Russell) had been charged with being asleep upon na°
occasion, when ho subsequently rose and replied upon
every point that had been raised during the time be bad
been charged with being asleep. Some indulged in r
mood of abstraction, and very often appeared inattentii
when they were most attentive. He did not wish to
speak of himself, but after what had been just said to
must say that he really did attend to what was sairli
lion. Gentlemen.

,~,;

1. .'J -_.~

-