The Sun.
London, England, 1837-12-19 00:00:00

THE BALLOT.

A NOBLE LORD presented a petition from Leamington and
its vicinity, in favour of the vote by Ballot.

NATIONAL EDUCATION.

Lord SANDON presented a petition, signed by 3,500 in-
habitants of Sheffield, with the residences of the petitioners,
praying that care might be taken that any system of national
education which might be adopted should be founded on Scrip-
tural principles.
Mr. DENISON presented a petition from the Dorking
Union in Surrey, praying that the owners of houses under Br.
a-year might be rated instead of the occupiers.
POOR LAWS (IRELAND).
Lord MORPETH presented a petition. from the inhabi-
tants of the town and county of Galway, in favour of a system
of Poor Laws for Ireland, founded on the principles laid down
in Mr. Nicholl's Report.
TITHES (IRELAND.)
The same Nouns Lotto presented also a petition from the
inhabitants of Nenagh and other parishes in the county of An-
trim, praying for the extinction of Tithes in Ireland.
MEDICAL EDUCATION.
The NOBLE LORD also presented a petition. from (as we un-
derstood) the College of Surgeons in Dublin, praying for the
interference of the Legislature to effect an improved system of
Medical Education in the United Kingdom.
DUTIES ON WOOL AND WOOLLEN CLOTHS.
The NoBLE Loan presented a petition from Belfast, praying
for a repeal of the import duties upon wool and olive oil, and
of the export duties upon woollen cloths from Ireland.
_ _

NEW POOR LAW.
Mr. COURTENAY gave notice that to-morrow he would
move for some returns relative to the new Poor-law—regard-

inv., we believe, the workhouse regulations of tho Com-
missioners.
DUDLEY ELECTION PETITION.
of Mr.
Mr. PRYME moved, in the matter of the petition
•
William Merryweather Turner, which he had obtain, ed leave
the other evening to have printed with the votes, that time be
given to complete his recognizances in the case of the Dudley_
Election Petition. It appeared that the petitioner's broil ter had
given in his name as Wm. Mcrryweather
ago he had obtained his Majesty's permission to adoptth
he anal" s
of Turner. His brother gave in the name as that by whichvit'
usually known, and the recognizance was rejected• The
peti-
tioner had received his commission as captain in the Noe,b
Glou-
cestershire Militia in that name, and it was decided Oat a Mar-
riage contracted under the name he was usually YanaAno
was a valid one, and in cases of indictment it Ives ,e
Under that mistake the petitioner's brother had acted, tala
(Mr. Pry me) now moved that the time fur perfecting.l he re-
cogn:zances be extended seven days from that date. •tber
Sir THOMAS FREMANTLE begged to ask
the Hon. Member was prepared with any evidence to °stay's
that fact.
Lord STANLEY—Then lam to understand that the
Hon. Member is not prepared with any evidence.
Mr. PRYME moved that the debate be adjournod till to:
morrow. —(No, no.) Then he was prepared to go into evi-
dence now.
William Merryweather Turner then appeared at the bar,ster h
°I
and in answer to the Speaker stated that he was a. barri.
at law, and was the petitioning candidate for the boroug
Dudley.
By Mr. PRYME—He gave in the name of hisn
brother, as one of the sureties for prosecuting that petitio:
His name was Montague John Merryweather; he bad obtained
his Majesty's licence to take in addition the nam e of Turrierci
but be was always known as Captain Merrvvreathe r. signe
his name as John Merryweather. He had seen him Gazette
three times as 'a captain in the Gloucestershire 'Militia,
Lase
Captain John Merryssenther. Witness had given in To
name by which ho usually went, as he connidered if
had given his name Turner, the parties would bare had mile'
difficult) in finding him out. He had never assumed the
name of Turner, except in some proceedings in Chancery.
By Sir T. FREM ANT LE—His brother lived at se
Over-
bury. Court, near Tewkesburr, with. his • father, whe,
name was Merryweather. He had newer known h'.°l
he
acs
ishi ulamnu
edretyrh, evavnhndiacmhh
eel, e o
didwf
asTsoTurner
becauseede xtto, eeapypt
apply,
in
ye,r
(tut
cbs
,c),uns
nepertcohteeeedendoai. rhea t
of
w
Turner.
By Sir H. HARDINGE—His brother signed his Wee
sometimessM. J. Turner, as in the proceedings in Chancel'''.
On his card he had M. J. Merryweather, and was known as
Captain Merryweather. He admitted that his brother ha'
signed his name in three different wane could not tellis
why his brother in the present instance h: id not signed h
!lame in a similar manner to that which he (VA in all proceed'
ings in Chancery, as he bad not bad any communication
with him since he had done so.
By Mr. PRYME—The signature was not the same
He
that which he adopted
in the proceedings in Chancery. i'

there signed his rime Montague J. Turner. the
By Sir THOS. FREMAN.TLE--ne effect of r
Ro3 al grant was to enable him to take the name of Turtle
instead of that of Merryweather.
By an Hon'. MEMBER—His brother took- property under tad
will upon the condition of taking the name of Turner 'note°
of that of Merryweather within twt lve montlki after his attaining
the age of twenty-one. His brother was no t a housekeeper;
and he had no property except that which he took Ode
the will, and he was nut to enjoy that u nless he sub'
stituted the name of Turner for that of .Merryweatker•
By Mr. AGLIONBY—He was bound to take the ea'''e_
of Turner, or not enjoy the property. On ait occasious
where he had to sign his name to affidavits in C,hancery,
ba
invariably signed that of Turner. He always use d the nan3°
of Turner in all legal proceedings,.
The witness then withdrew.
Mr. PRYME—As he was prevented from submitting that
the recognizances were sufficient, he would move that seven
days further time should be given to the petitioner to conl°
plete his recognizances.
Sir T. FREMANTLE said that he had witnesses etlitd*
side, living in the neighbourhood of Over bury, who vf(l',.
give a different account of the habit of Capta in Merrywcatt
in signing his name, from that which had bee u given by the
last witness.

Mr. John Wilson Capcwell was then called it,, and in all.
swer to questions from Sir T. Fremantle, he ate ted that be
lived at Dudley, near Overbury, in Worcestershire, and was
surveyor of reads. Although he made inquiries, he could o°''_
find a place called Overbury Court. He made inquiry' whether
there was a family at Overbury village of the name of Merl-
weather, and found them by the name of Turner.
Question.—Was there any person connected with that fienilf
who went by the name of Captain Turner?
in
Answer.—l was given to understand by several pe..B 0;;
the village that a Captain Turner, a Mrs. Turner, a Mr. Tu
ner and a Miss Turner lived there.—( A laugh.)
By Sir T. FREMANTLE—Did you hear of any p ellen
besides of the name of Turner ?
Witness—l think I heard that there was a Captain M err)'
weather Turner there, who had come from Cheltenham- „
Question—Did you go there to inquire into the sufficieno
of Captain Turner ?
Answer—l went to ascertain if be was there. If Iba abaci),
there to ascertain, his sufficiency, I could not form any no tion (34
his property. I found no person to answer to the doscie".ptir
of Montague Merryoreealnr. I cannot say whether Ca put!
Turner has a house of his own, but I know that he is oat the
tenant of the house in which he lives. I found that th e fal
mily resided in Orerbury-house, near Overbury village.
could find no place by the name of Overbury Cow h
hare not said just now that Captain Turner lived olt,
his father.—(Laughter, and loud cries of " No, ne..l
I heard of no one of the name of Mcrryweather. I hart' se'l
that they were all called Turner.—( Laughter. )
Mr. STANLEY here said that the witness hart RI,
ready stated that Captain Turner was known by
name of Captain Merryweather Turner, the witness being t°
terrogated, denied that he had said so. He was ordea,e"
withdraw, and a short-hand writer's notes being refer
red to, gave his answer to the question—" Did yeti hear
of any person named Captain Merryweather?
" I think I heard that a Captain Merryweather Turner °as
there, and that he had come from Cheltenham." es
The witness being recalled, the short hand writer's lie. a
were read to him, when he said that to his knowledge be ha
not stated that he bad heard of Captain Merryweather Tarn
Examined by Mr. AGLIONBY—I went to make there
enquiries partly at my own suggestion and partly at the edireei
tion of some gentlemen residing at Dudley, where I live•
do not think it proper to state the names of those gentle ntelli
Examined by Mr. JER V IS—I came to learn ilia
this family went by the name of Turner, became
so
I could not find them by the name of Merryweather ; and tue„j
were known by the name of Turner. (Cries of " Hear, beer;
I went to inquire who lived in Overbury House, and I was
formed it was Mr. Merryweathe:. The person from
I made these inquiries told me that Captain Ttira-ni
lived with his father. I cannot tell what the nennte
Captain Turner's father is, further than from what I beta',
where I inquired. Made all the inquiries I could in landl,hl;
as I knew that I should be examined before this House 00 '—
subject.
To Mr. FERGUSON—I could not find, by the naive of
Merryweather, the person whom I inquired after. tit
To Sir THOMAS FREMANTLE—WhiIe I ‘lll5 ii.,
Overbury, the postman happened to be there, and on entl—r,
ing from him, ho told me that letters were directed to Orr
bury House to Captain Turner, and to Mr. Turner.
The witness wr.s then ordered to withdraw.
Mr. Philpotts said that he happened to know the father t!,1101
son, and recollected being asked by the father to dine V, i tith, Try.
while he was living at Cheltenham by the name of tv'e'tho
weather, and he was on that occasion also introduced 50
son as Captain Turner.
Mr. HUME said that he had at home a letter front ith;
father of the gentleman, who was the late candidate for Dud e
and it was signed " Merryweather." letter
An. HON. MEMBER wished to know whether the the
alluded to by the lion. Member for Kilkenny related to
present inquiry ? • •
_ .

Mr. HUMS said that it related to the last election. ,in,
Mr. Merryweather Turner was re-called, and stated .in ;e r
swer to questions by fir. Pryme, that his father had vcacr
used the name of Turner, and that he had no interest tia
the will. 1 i 0
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL—There was a su'-
taCht
the
Bi
Overbu=y
viceesemrribrybu
eTrdryet
ifpoceorno A
,udTiri
Tewkesbury.
,wgslw(uephsFoibeniuhtrtEywh.mea
ssAu
Witness'stbNijl eTetpocrfo .p—t bfearetlith:viesiorlfl
father.
m r.
parent
c sidedt.
i,
for it. When in the country he resided there wiPthatligtplaotnbacort;
He had no other residence in the country. When ill , over-
By Mr. AGLIONBY.—There was no
he resided in Charles-street. His father had lived a'
bury-court rather more than six months.
post-office or i-
ot-
ing-house at Overbury. Fre-
By Sir T. FREMANTLE—His brother was at the ,-
sent time residing with his father at Overbury Court.
The witness thn withdrew. into
Mr. PRYME then moved that the time for entering
the
the required recognizanees should be extended to Taisti3Y
26th of December. ti of
Sir T. EaFREMANTL did not see how thei: extension
of
the time could meet the e, as it was an entire change
name.
to ilalarc.erAtaGiaL
tlhOaNyllsiutyggoefsttehde thaautretthieca,Haonusdo
fraudulent, to grant the indulgence re s the r'
Sir T. FREMANTLE observed that unles
be better to
diction of the House was entirely changed, it would°
the discre„
take the question out of the House, and to trust t
tier, of the examiners. I d found the ell'
etlilteceupon t e Ras
quired. isfhonuoldtgfla:
And his °P all wo
M. r..PR YME remarked that he often ia
11 coo-
t at a
15."
l'av°rith the evidence
vdaetnicceattoofg.Q_ua(kielersar,verhyeapru.r)e and honest, In 4 s.ciamett_T:: vtbat
the evidence of Mr. Capewell
%ler
sistent either with his on h of
of
of the other witnesses. He thought that,
House might safely grant
XCHEQUER said it se
tChaapitaadi no l
gMeenrcray vit-heaatthwear 'ss
absrktioctdlei
.evri d,
The CHANCELLOR of the E .
jmcde of dispol
matters. But he thought there w0..,;,rd
that
was
by
cnintg:inr..
of this case without Any
substitution
of this Captain Mer.t.
unfortunate that this House had no eqiialtanbalvve 'urisdiction in the
the Solvent. y , n time.---( Hear
debate.
o in the n.ea f the
the= might be examined int _ , tnent 0 . ut le
ted an acuourn thing b
Lord SANDON sugges .
the Karst` anY rty 0°
ttlaiaeutyimael,lofovrrebdy, zddoing dtliifflecuubtl.e.ution of the nalue vgrai!,,cll..
Mr. COITRTENAY thought ,
°l' ;caw bi
condition that he would=s the
) questions
w matter of feint.
Courtenay q
occasions. Now ho (
A geatiernan handanolob,
arliltu'erndera Pr°Pll legal

L_

1114sj net io zatrred a forfeiture of his estate for neglecting to
.ij'""-f„ Oh, oh )
„;k:4rt .C. HOBHOUSE said the question of sufficiency
th
.1;c ,be decided by the examiners alone. He did not think
e ;,st, Souse had any jurisdiction in the matter until they had
of e their decision. As he did not see the slightest indication
any fraud, be should vote for the extension of the time for
S'-thing in the recognizanoes.
Mr. MACLE AN opposed the motion.
Mr. CHARLES WOOD thought a sufficient case had
twen made out to allow the extension for the time asked.
Lord SANDON felt bound to oppose the motion.
Sir R. PEEL thought the legal name ought to have been
given, and that course not having been adopted, the motion
'ought not to be granted. If the House did grant the motion
it would be giving a premium to fraud, and would relax its
rules established for' a series of years in an improper manner.
He fano& the House ought to have the opinion of the Chair,
-43 to what course ought to be pursued.
The SPEAKER thought, in cases like the present, the
:rules of the House might to be rigidly adhered to.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL referred to a ca.e which occurred
last week, in which time had been given. In that case the
Party had been rejected by the examiners, because he had not
been described as a trader, which he was. In that
case the priaties were allowed to amend the description.
Having, on Friday night, decided that the rigid -rule was to
be relaxed, it would scarcely be just now to stria that rule—
(Hear, her r)--especially as the present was, if possible, a
leetter er.se for indulgence.—( Hear.)
Sir H. HA RDINGE said, that on Friday night
br,.d decided in favour of the indulgence, because the Noble
lArd the Member for Devon (Lord Ebrington) had given his
a'..surance as to the validity of the sureties. But on this oc-
casion he thought the rule, as stated by the Speaker, was
preferable to the house taking an equitable jurisdiction
into its own hands—( Hear, hear,)—and he should be equally
ready to rescind the decision of the House on Friday.
Mr. E. STANLEY asked if the House had that power?
The SPEAKER said, undoubtedly the House did possess
that power.
Mr. AGLIONBY thought the whole circumstances of the
Pontefract case ought to be brought before the House. In this
case he should give his vote in favour of indulgence, for he
thought it a bona fide case, but in the Pontefract case gross
fraud had been committed.
Mr. FRE SHFIE LD considered that in this cue there had
been negligence.
Lord HOWICK said it was highly important that election
T2etitions should be shut out by merely technical objections.--
( Hear, hear.) Care should be taken that the object of the
law was fulfilled—that the sureties were valid—but that bona
,fide errors should. be ground for indulgence.—( Hear, hear,
and loud cries of " Question.")
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw.
The House then divided when there appeared--
For the original motion
Against it 6B

Majority for the motion 55
PONTEFRACT ELECTION PETITION.
Mr. AGLIONBY stated that within the last few minutes
be had been very earnestly requested to ask the House to
give instructions that Mr. Gompertz shonld also attend to-
morrow. He begged to move, therefore, that Mr. Gom-
pertz be required to attend.
The motion was (as we understocd) agreed to.
PENSIONS' LIST COMMITTEE.
The order of the day for the House resolving itself into
Committee of Supply being again moved,
Sir GEORCIE SINCLAIR rose to call the attention of
the House to the situation in which it stood with respect to
the Pension List Committee. Looking at the time which had
been occiapied, he would not say wasted, in the discussion
of that evening, and seeing that the subjects which stood
upon Ole paper were most of them of a description to lead
to deleate, it appeared to him not only improbable that the
quinstion of how the Committee was to be constituted could
ome forward at the usual hour that evening, but highly
improbable, also, that it could be brought forward at a rea-
sonable hour on any evening previous to the recess. But,
however that may be, it appeared to him that it would be
only fair that the House should be put in possession of the
names which her Majesty's Ministers proposed to place
upon the Committee one day, at least before the
discussion took place.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Many per-
sons, both in and out of the House, entertained a
great jealousy as to the names to be placed upon the
Committees, especially when it was remembered that one
of her Majesty's Ministers [as we understood the Hon. Ba-
ronet] had upon a former occasion declared an inquiry of this
kind to be unjust and disgusting. It was anxiously desired,
be believed on all sides, that the inquiry should be fair and
impartial, and that it should be entered upon with as little de-
lay as possible. Of course until the Committee was named
he did not know whether the Hon. Member for Southwark
was to be placed upon i; or nut ; but if he were not, he must
say that he ( Sir G. Sinclair) thought the Hon. Member
would be treated unjustly or unfairly, because if the Hon.
Member had himself been permitted to bring the question for-
'ward, as he bad done on many previous occasions, there could
be no doubt but that he would have been a Member of the
Committee. He (Sir George Sinclair) thought, therefore,
that the Committee should be named without delay, and that
oue day at least should be given to the House to consider
whether' the recommendations of the Ministry were such as
would entitle the Committee to the respect and confidence of
the country.—(Hear, hear.) If the Right Hon. Gentleman
the Chancellor of the Exchequer would consent to an ar-
rangement of that kind, he ( Sir George Sinclair) would not
say more upon the subject that evening ; but if the question
were again postpor ed, and no time fixed for its consideration,
and if, when it were brought forward, the House was to be
called upon to decide at once as to the propriety of the relation
made by the Government, he should then certainly feel it to
be his duty to take the sense of the House upon the subject.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not
know to what practical conclusion the Hon. Baronet's observa-
tions tended. He told the Hon. Baronet on a former occasion,
and he had also repeated it to him again that night, that there
was no intention on the part of the Government of bringing
on the question, which, as they were informed, was to become
the matter of a debate at a late or inconvenient hour. If it
were brought forward at any period that might be inconvenient
to the Hon. Baronet, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer)
should be the first person to say, " Let it be postponed to
some future time that might be more convenient." At the
same time he must observe that any inconvenience that might
arise to individual and particular Members, was an inconve-
nience for which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was
not responsible. The Hon. Baronet now called upon him to
give the names of the Members whom it was proposed to
place upon the Committee. Now he found upon the order
paper for to-morrow a notice of motion given by the Hon.
Member for Kilkenny, that in future the nomination of indivi-
duals to be placed upon Committees should alwats he
given for some time prcceder.t to the appointment of the
Committee.—(Hear, hear.) It was not for him the (the
Chancellor of the Exchequer) to say whether he considered
such a course as convenient or not, but at all events it was
a question that was to be fairly raised to-morrow, and there-
fore the Honourable Baronet would excuse him if he declined
t° enter into a discussion of it to-day. If the House should
decide the motion of the Honourable Member for Kilkenny in
the affirmative to-morrow, he (the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer) should be perfectly satisfied to postpone the nomination
of the Committee until Wednesday ; and, in obedience to the
decision of the House, to give in the names of the Gentlemen
he should propose as Members of it to-morrow. He had no
wish, he had no idea whatever, in naming the Committee, to
make it other than a tribunal which should discharge honestly
and efficiently the duty with which it was to be entrusted.—
( Hear, hear.) And, if the names ultimately suggested did not
justify that declaration of his intention, it would bo for the
House to object to any or all of those names, and to substitute
others in their place.
Mr. D. W. HA RVEY observed that the notice of the Ho-
nourable Member for Kilkenny appeared to be a perfect
Godsend to the Government.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh.)
There was in fact no straw however filthy or however
small, at which they would not catch to save thernselres
from this inquiry.—( Hear, hear.) What the Honourable
Baronet (Sir G. Sinclair) wished to know was whether this
important motion was to be submitted to the House at a cor•
rest and appropriate time. " As regards myself," continued
the Hon. Gentleman, " remembering my declaration of the
other evening, a declaration which subsequent reflection in-
duces me to repeat, I relieve the Right Honourable Gentle-
man from any oppression as to placing me upon the Com-
mittee. After the treatment to which I have been exposed I
repeat that nothing under heaven shall induce me to serve
upon a Committee appointed by the Right Honourable Gen-
tleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer—(hear, hear)—but
at the same time, if the House upon consideration should
think as I do, that the course proposed by the Government is
a most censurable course—if the House, echoing the opinions
and sentiments of the country, shall think that I ought to be
placed upon the Committee, I shall cheerfully bow to its de-
cision. I will not describe my opinion of the conduct that has
been pursued in this matter, because it is rot the first time
that I have been treated in a similar manner. Some years
ago I brought forward a subject connected with the Woods
and Forests, to which I had devoted weeks and months of my
time. No sooner had I brought it to maturity, when it was
likely to be useful, than the Government took it out of my
hands and made it a perfect abortion.—( Hear.) Whether
that is the course which it is proposed now to pursue I
will not say, though past experience may suggest the appre-
hension of it ; but this I will say, that I think the conduct of
the Government towards me extremely ungenerous and un-
manly.—( Hear, hear.)
Sir G. SINCLAIR—Under these circumstances I shall
' move as an amendment to the motion now before the House,
that the Order of the Day for the appointment of the Pension
' List Committee be now read ; and upon that amendment I will
take the sense of the House.
The question having been put,
Mr. WARBURTON entreated the Government to state at
' once the names they proposed to place upon the Committee.
They must have fully considered the names they intended to
propose,_( Hear.) Then why not mention them at once,
and put an end to all further doubt and anxiety upon the
--subject.—( Hear.) They were bound in common justice to
the Honourable Mi mber fur Southwark no longer to allow the
question to remain in suspense, leaving his name to be bandied
about by the public, as it would naturally be, as long as it re-
/naked a matter of doubt whether be were to sit upon the
Cc mmittee or not. It was not dealing fairly with an indivi-
dual Member of the House, to allow him to be treated in this
manner.—( Hear.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL—I admit that the Honourable
Member for Southwark is placed in a situation that can not
but be disagreeable in consequerce of the questions that have
been raised—( Hear, hear)—but that is no fault of ours—
(Hear)—the fault, if any, is owing to others, not to us.—
(Hear, hear.) But, at the same time, I will say, that owing,

as it is, to other parties, I am still ready, if it be the opinion
of the Horse that the matter has been involved in an
obscurity and doubt from which it ought to be cleared--I am
ready, I sac, as far as the Governmcnt is concerned, to call
open my Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, and to request him (a request with which I know he will
rot h-sitate to comply) to place upon the Notice-book this
evening the ❑ames of the Members whom he proposes to place
upon the Committee. Is that what the Honourable Baronet
wishes ?—( Cries of " No, no.")
After a moment's pause,
Sir GEORGE SINCLAIR ruso and sad—That t+i!l not
correspond with my views upon the subject ; I shall take the
serve of the House upon the amendment I have moved.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL resumed—Then I must proceed
at once to state the grounds upon which we propose to act
with regard to the Hon. Member for Southwark.—( Hear.)
Lest year the Hon. Member was placed upon the Committee
which sat upon the Report of the Poor-laws. The Committ
found that all their proceedings were reported in the daily
newspapers, generally fully reported ; some times only in
portions, consisting of extracts end selected passages ; but
in one shape or the other; whether at full length or only
in part, the publication of their proceedings was continued
from day to day. This, as the House wid perceive, was
in direct contravention of the directions placed upon all
the papers delivered to Members of Committees---" that
it is particularly requested that these papers may not
be communicated to any other persons, being intended
solely for use of the Committee."—( Hear, hear.) The sub-
ject of the publication of their proceedings was brought under
the notice of the Committee, and your authority, Sir, was
mentioned as conclusive, that no member of the Committee
ought to disregard or to commit a breach of the order attached
to the papers placed in his hand. The lion. Member for
Southwark, as I understand, did not deny that the publication
complained of originated with him. I then thought it neces •
sary, in order that the Hon. Member might have no room for
doubt, to bring forward a question in this House as to the
right of members of Committees to make publications cf the
proceedings that took place before them; and the resolution
which I then proposed was agreed to after a division upon the
question of adjournment, but without any division upon the
question itself. I have that resolution now before me ;it was
agreed to by the House on the 21st of April last, and is in
the following terms :—" That according to the undoubted
privileges of this House, and for the due protection of the
public niter. st, the evidence taken by any Select Committee
of this House, and documents presented to such Committee,
and which have not been reported to the House, ought not to
be published by any member of such Committee, or by any
other person." I had hoped that such a resolution on
the part of the House would have taken away any doubt or
hesitation that any Member of the Committee could have en-
tertained as to the propriety or the right of publishing what
transpired before a Select Committee prior to the Report of
Jest Committee having been made to the House. But such
was not the result. The publication continued, and the
Members of the Committee were placed in the very great diffi-
culty—a difficulty which all felt to be very great and very
painful—of being either obliged to report from day to day,
contrary to the opinion of a large majority of them, or to con-
nive at a daily infringement of the Orders of the House, or
else to bring the proceedings before the House, to ask the
House to proceed to the vindication of its own rights and pri-
vileges, and thus have produced a feeling in the public mind
that an Hon. Member who took a strong part against the Poor
Law Amendment Act was to be visited with punishment in
consequence of his opposition to that measure. As the least
of these evils we took the course of reporting from day to day
the proceedings of the Committee. lam afraid, Sir, that
that course must have met with your disapprobation.—(Hear,
hear.) I know that many Members of the Committee, and
many Members of the House, I believe amongst others my
Honourable Friend the Chairman of the Committee, disap-
proved of this course—( Hear, hear, hear)—a course which
was taken at my suggestion, and supported by the Hon.
Baronet the Meniber for Buckingham (Sir Thomas Freman-
tle.) Such was the course which we ultimately adopted ' • but
previously to our doing so the Hon. Member for Southwark
opposing himself to the resolution of the House, continued
his publication, and the rest of- the Committee, not willing to
take any strong course, allowed the resolution to remain
during that time in suspense. Though armed with the reso-
lution of the House to protect its proceedings, and though
the Hon. Member continued his daring defiance of that
resolution, the Committee did not proceed to act upon it ;
but adopted the milder course, attended as it was with a
hundred i nconveniences, of reporting its own proceedings
from day to day. But, although in the instance of the
Poor-law Committee we took the course which we thought
the most expedient, yet I must say that I am not prepared
again to place upon a Select Committee of this House
terminated by any Member of the Government an Hon.
Member who defied the resolution of the House---(Cheers)
—who stated that he would be guided solely by his own
opirrien, contrary to the decision of this House, and between
whom and the House, if be were again placed upon a Select
Committee, a question must arise—one of the questions
which are the most injurious to the reputation of the House—
namely, a question in which the dissentient Member is made
apparently a martyr to the resolutions and proceedings of
this House in the vindication of its own;prieileges.—( Hear.)
We have known in former days how much popular excitement
has been caused by sending the members of Committees to
places
_of eonfinement ; and we all know that some Members
of the House have owed much of their popular reputation to
that very resistance to the orders and privileges of the House
of which the Hon. Member for Southwark gave an in-
stance upon the Poor-law Committee.—( Hear, hear.) I think,
then, that the safest course—much as it may bo disapproved
of—much as it may be made the subject of popular mis-
representation—l still think that the safest course for us to
pursue will be to name as fair and just a Committee as we
can, but not to place upon it the name of the Honourable
Member for Southwark.—( Hear, hear.) If the House
chooses to say, " Let our privileges be in abeyance, let all
our orders be disobeyed—any Member who pleases shall have
his own will and pleasure upon Committees, uneontradicted
by the House"—if the House choose to say so, let it be
so, but let it not come from us—(Hear, hear)—let it not be
said that it was the Government who proposed to invade and
trample upon the privileges of the House.—( Hear, hear.) I
should be forgetful of the privileges of the House, and un-
mindful of those serious difficulties in which we were involved
in the last Session, and which I am sure no gentleman who
sat upon the Poor-law Committee can ever forget, if I were
to propose the nomination of the Hon. Member for Southwark
upon another Select Committee.--( Hear, lnar. ) I will only
in conclusion add, that should the Civil List Act be proceeded
with to-night, my Right Hon. Friend will be ready to give
notice of the names he proposes to place upon the Com-
mittee.—( Hear, hear. )
Mr. HALL regretted that the Hon and Learned Gentle-
man the Member for Southwark was not to be on the Com-
mittee—he having devoted considerable time and labour to the
investigation of the Pension List, and that in opposition to the
different Governments of the day. This subject had now been
brought forward for five or six years, and those who were the
most deeply interested in it would n.ot consider that full justice
was intended to be done if the name of the Hon. aid Learned
Member for Southwark were omitted. There were two parties
interested in the question—the public and the pensioners
Among the latter was a Nobleman, a relative of whom had told
him (Mr. Hall) that the Isiah of that Noble Lord was to have
the subject fully and fairly investigated, and that he should not
consider the Object satisfactorily inquired into unless the Hon.
and Learned Member for Southwark were on the Committee.
Hear, bear.) He (Mr. Hall) was quite sure that if that
lion. and Learned Gentleman were not nominated the object
of his Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer
would at once be defeated. In taking the appointment of the
Committee out of the hands of the Hon. and Learned Mem-
ber, his Right Hon. Friend stated that be was anxious to take
the whole responsibility of it upon himself. He (Mr. Hall)
thought it was desirable that the Government should stand in
that responsible situation; but he also was of opinion that at
the time Lis Right Hon. Friend took upon himself that re-
sponsibility, he ought to have stated that it was not the inten-
tion of the Government to place the name of the lion. and
Learned Member on the list. Certain documents having ap-
Fared in a public print, he felt justified in adverting to them.
They consisted of a letter addressed by the Chancellor of the
Exchequer to the Hon. and Learned Member for Southwark,
and of- that Hon. and Learned Member's reply. ( Mr.
Hall) should say that the statement made by his Right Hon.
Friend bad been answered in a manner in which he should
conceive every Hon. Gentleman would have answered it. If
any proposition had been made to him (Mr. Hall) to be on the
Committee, but in order to be so it must be a sine qua non
that he should forego any right or privilege—( Hear, hear)—
which he believed that as a Member of Parliament he pos-
sessessed, he would not have consented to be on that Com-
mittee.—( Hcar, hear.) He used the words " right or pri-
v:lege," because it was a fact that what the Hon. and
Learned Mernber for Southwark had on a former occasion
done had received the approbation and sanction of the House
of Commons.—( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Hall) did not mean
to say that the course pursued by the lion. and Learned
Member on the occasion alluded to was that course which he
himself should have adopted—( Hear, hear)—still it was a
course which was, be repeated, afterwards sanctioned by the
House itself. All that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman did
was to publish the evidence taken before the Poor-law Com-
mittee, of which he was a member, from day to day. He (Mr.
Hall) would ask, was there anything which could prevent that
Hon. and Learned Gentleman pursuing the same course with
respect to the present Committee, bah-steer he was a member
of it or not? Whether a member or no member, he would
have the same means of information, unless, indeed, it was
intended to make it a Secret Committee. He would have
equal access to the Committee room ; and what power did
the House possess by which to prevent him from making
public that which he there beard ? But this was a point of
very minor consideration. The main question was, whether
the House would give finality to the inquiry. into the Pension
List. If any question ought to be final--considered kith a
view of satisfying the public—it was this question, which
involved the ascertaining of facts as they really were, but which
AS they were supposed to be at present, and without inquiry,
were odious in the eyes of the public. But no satisfactory in-
quiry could take place, not only unless the fullest investiga-
tion were allowed, but unless also the Hon. and Learned
I Member, whose name was associated in the minds of the peo-
ple with the subject of the Pension List, and whose determiea-
tion to enter into every abuse, and capability to direct such
an investigation, were included in the Cemmittee. He (Mr.
Hall) believed it was the invariable practice of Parliament,
when any person had so devoted his time and talent to the
consideration of a subject as to lead to the appointment of a
Committee, that such person should be placed on the Commit-
tee. This was a practice not merely founded in courtesy,
but was also grounded upon wisdom. It was grounded upon
wisdom, because it was natural to conclude that any person
possessing the information which the devotion of time and