The Sun.
London, England, 1838-03-16 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT,

HO 'ME iir LORDS, lILIRcti Ib.
'fte Li)111) CHANCELLQR took his seat on the woolsack at
five o'clock.
NEGRO APPRENTICESHIP.—LORD
BROUGHAM'S BILL. ,_L,_,,,
In answer to a questien Crum the Diikt of WittiLiNuTo IN,
Lord BROUGHAM said, that for the convenience of their
Lordships he would state what course he intended to pursue ;
but at the same time he was perfectly open to their Lord-
ships' suggestions, and if any other better course could
be pointed out, he would most readily prefer it.—
( Hear, hear.) His Bill would be to amend the Act
of 1833, by substituting the word " Ist of August, 1838," for
" Ist of August, 1840." He should in all probability present
it without observation, or at all events with as few observa-
tions as possible. His original intention had been to present
the Bill before the Easter recess, simply laying it on the
table, and to say not a word about it till after the recess, and
for this reasoa—that the subject on both sides had been dis-
cussed before their Lordships. Therefore if the Bill was not
to pass it did not signify whether it was brought in before or
after Easter.
The Duke of WELLINGTON asked the Noble and
Learned Lord whether he intended to propose any amend-
ments to the Ministerial Bill.
Lord BROUGHAM said the Ministers had incorporated
into their measure all his resolutions but the last, which in his
opinion was the only one of importance.—( Laughter. ) He
did not think he should do justice if he were to bring on his
measure by a side wind, and therefore he should not move
any amendments to the Ministerial measure.
The Duke of CLEVELAND presented a petition from
Stockton-on-Tees, for the immediate abolition of the appren-
ticeship system.
The Earl of ALBE M A RL E, in the absence of the Duke of
Sutherland, presented petitions from Hadleigh, Woodbridge,
Needham \larket, Crayfield, Sutton, and other places in Suf-
folk, to the same effect. Also, in the absence of Lord Dun-
gannon, a petition from the inhabitants of Calmore, in the
County of Down, against the Irish Poor Law Act.
The Earl of FALMOUTH presented a petition from Truro
against the Apprenticeship System.
The Earl of DEVON presented a petition from Ivy-
bridge to the same effect.
Lord DA CRE presented similar petitions from Uxbridge
and Bradley, in Yorkshire.
Lord R EDE SDA LE presented a petition from Lyme
Regis against the national system of education, also a petition
from the females of that place to the same effect.
Lord IL C Il E STE R presented petitions from several places
in Bridgewater against the apprenticeship system.
The Earl of WICKLOW had a petition to present
which had been entrusted to him by a party with
whom he had no connection. He understood the petition was re-
spectably signed, and he could undertake to say it was nume-
rously signed. The petitioners stated that owing tothe inflamma-
tory language made use of by some of the Roman Catholic priests
in one of the Chapels in the county of Cork, the officer com-
manding the detachment was obliged to order his men to
withdraw from the Chapel, and praying their Lordships to
pass some enactment in order to prevent the Roman
Catholic Clergy from interfering in controverted elections.
It was decidedly a great breach of duty that any priest should
deviate from his religious trust to interfere with the business
of a contested election. But though he was aware it was not
possible for their Lordships directly to interfere for
this purpose, he was decidedly of opinion the evil might
be very much conteracted by indirect legislation. The
greatest evil that prevailed on this point, he conceived to
be the Roman Catholic Priests exerting their influence to
induce persons who knew they had no votes, to go to the
poll to exercise the right franchise. It was with great
satisfaction he had observed that the House of Commons
had introduced a measure, that would in a great de-
gree go to remedy the evil ; and if he found the object
of the Government to be to counteract the vicious system
which had existed since the Act of 1829, which established
the Registry List in Ireland, he should be most
anxious to co-operate with them 'to pass the Bill into
a law ; but if it were such a jobbing Bill as came
up on the same subject a Session or two ago, whereby it was
intended to vest the appointment of the Revising Barristers in
the hands of the Government, by which means Government
would have an almost complete influence over the voters,
he should, as he bad done before, most proudly move
for its rejection. The petition was from a barony in
the county of Cork, praying their Lordships to adopt some
Legislative provision for the purpose of preventing the Roman
Catholic Clergy from exercising their influence at elections.
Lord BROUGHAM said that the Noble Earl had
not hit upon one remedy—he meant that of a State provision,
which he believed would be very much opposed by the Clergy
themselves, and afterwards by the Primates.—(Hear, hear,
from the Opposition.)
The NOBLE and LEARNED LORD then presented petitions
from Dunfermline, the Associated United Congrega-
tions of Paisley, and the United Congregation of Paisley,
against further endowments to the Church of Scot-
land. Also petitions from Warrington, Melton, Hackleton
in Hampshire, Langley, Brigg House, Lochwood, Heck-
mondwike, Canterbury, Macclesfield, Yelverthorp, Nor-
wich, Nloley, and East Linton in Haddington-shire,
all praying for the immediate abolition of slavery.
The Noble Lord also presented similar petitions from Dalton-
upon-Tees; from Radford, Durham, Liverpool, Macclesfield,
Rochester, and other places. The Noble Lord also presented
several petitions from Glasgow and Leith against any further
endowment to the Church of Scotland.
Lord STRADBROOK presented petitions from different
parts of Suffolk against the negro apprenticeship system.
Lord BROUGHAM moved for certain returns respecting
the Slave Trade.—Ordered.
The Bishop of LONDON presented a petition from the
Isle of Man praying for an augmentation of the vicarages.
YEOMANRY CORPS.
The Earl of lIA [MING TON wished to put a question to
the Noble Viscount opposite, relative to the disbanding
of the Yeomanry Corps in Scotland.—( Hear, hear.)
He wished to know whether, after that event took place,
there would be a single corps of Yeomanry in Scotland.
Lord MELBOURNE believed that there would.
SODOR AND MAN.
The Sodor and Man Bishopric Continuation Bill went
through Committee, and was ordered to be reported to-morrow.
CLERGY RESIDENCE BILL.
thisOn
Bill
lhwe masroetn
aiodaosfecthone
dArchbishoptime,and
The House then Adjourned. ordered o f
CAtoNbTeE Ilßi
committed. R Y ,

HOUSE OP COMMONS, M4Rcu 13.
In consequence of the Ballots for the Kingston-upon-Hull
and Shaftesbury Election Committees, the gallery was not
opened until 20 minutes to five.
CARLOW (COUNTY) ELECTION COMMITTEE.
Mr. MILDMAY brought up a report from the Carlow
(County) Election Committee, statin' that they had re-
ceived a communication from Lord Robert Grosvenor, their
Chairman, informing them that he was so ill as to be un-
able to attend, and they were consequently obliged to ad-
journ till to-morrow.
Mr. MACKINNON said that as he was a Member of the
Committee, and as some informality had occurred in their pro-
ceedings, he would shortly state to the House.the circumstances
which had taken place since the Ballot on Tuesday last. Imme-
diately after the Ballot they adjourned to one of the Com-
mittee Rooms, and they elected the Noble Lord, the Mem-
ber for Chester, their Chairman. He took the Chair and
adjourned the Committee to half-past three o'clock Yes-
terday. On taking the Chair yesterday the Noble Lord
said that his health was so delicate, that he did not know
whether he would be able to act or not, and requested his
Hon. Friend the Member for Winchester to act for him, to
which no opposition was made by the Committee, and the
Hon. Member for Winchester accordingly took the chair. On
referring to the Act of Parliament which governs Election
Committees, 9 Geo. IV., sec. 37, it appeared to him ( Mr.
Mackinnon) that unless prevented by death or unavoidable
absence, sanctioned by leave from the House, the person elected
as Chairman was obliged to act in that capacity. In this case
the Noble Lord was certainly not dead—( A laugh)—and, ac-
cording to his interpretation of the Act of Parliament, he be-
lieved that no individual Member could be absent from the
sittings of the Committee, unless he obtained the sanction of
the House, founded upon evidence taken upon oath, that he
was unable to attend. It appeared to him, according to his
construction of the Act, that, if the Noble Lord was their
Chairman on Tuesday, he was specially so yesterday. Now
the dilemma in which they were placed was just this—the
Noble Lord was either Chairman of the Committee, or he
was not. If he was Chairman, all that had been done by the
Hon. Member for Winchester in that capacity was informal.
If he was exempted from acting as Chairman, it could be
only on evidence taken before the House that he was not
able to attend. He had stated in the Committee this morning
nearly in the same words the doubts which he entertained
upon this subject, and he now wished to put it distinctly
to the House whether his Honourable Friend the Mem-
ber for Winchester could be supposed to be legally
appointed as Chairman; and, if not, the proceedings being in-
formal, whether they ought not to proceed again de novo. In
stating these things to the House ho had no other motive than
to prevent expense to the parties, for he apprehended that if his
Hon. Friend, the Member for Winchester, was not in a legal
sense chairman, any warrants or summonses signed by him
would he ineffective.
Mr. MILDMAY said, that in taking the chair by the una-
nimous consent of the Committee, he had believed he was
acting right, and he was rather confirmed in that opinion
by what had been stated by his Hon. Friend, of the view
which he took of the Act of Parliament. He thought that
the Committee had a perfect right to change their Chair-
man if they thought proper.—( Hear, hear.) Let them
take the case in this way—they sent a Committee from the
table to make arrangements with respect to their own internal
regulations, and one of these was the choice of a Chairman.
In the long experience which he had had of these matters, he
had never known the House to interfere, unless where they
had originally exercised a power which had been tampered
with—that is to say, when the original number of the
Committee had been altered. The choice of a Chairman
lay entirely with the Committee themselves. They had
the power of rescinding the original resolution appoint-
ing a Chairman, and of putting another man in his place,
and the House had nothing to do with the matter. Let them
suppose the case of a person who was elected Chairman, but
was incompetent, from some cause or other, to act. Surely,
in that case, it could never have been intended that the Com-
mittee should have no power of changing him. These were
the considerations which had influenced him in taking the
chair, at the request of the Noble Lord, and with the con-
sent of the Committee. _ _

KINGSTON-ON-HULL ELECTION COMMITTEE.
The Clerk appeared at the bar with the following reduced

list of the Committee on the Hull Election pdtitiottr—Frede-
Fick Dundas, George Alfred Nluskett. Hon. Charles Laxl'tfl-
CorrAin§ O'Brien, Nicholas Fitzsimon, Sir William
Lawrence tointi Archibald Hastie, J. R. Orsmby Gore,
Samuel White, Sir Gear& gtrieidarid, and Lord Viscount
Mare.

The Mernbefs were then sworn in the tisuftl mannet.
CAALOW tiACTION COMMITTEE.

Sir EDWAkIi SiTG6cOntendCcfthat the appoint-
ment of another Hon. Member to the office of Chairman till

illegal, without the sanction of that 1-louse. It was clear, ac-
cording to the provisions of the Act, that the Committee had
no power to alter the Chairman without such authority. The
clause provided that every Committee on meeting should elect
a Chairman, and if there were an equal number of votes, the
Member first called in the House should have a casting
vote. So in like manner, in case of the or of the
death of a Chairman. It appeared to him that any
ihing done by the Committee ministerially was not
on account of that proceeding illegal, but if the Committee
came to a vote upon any question. he should say that it was
illegal. The proceeding, however, was merely informal, and
had the Committee in the first instance come to that House,
no inconvenience or irregularity would have occurred.
After a few words from Lord Grosvenor, Sir E. Sugden,
and Mr. R. Stuart, who were inaudible in the gallery,
Mr. GO UL BURN said he conceived that the law of
the case was clear. At all events he could say from an ex-
perience in Parliament of thirty years that the practice had
been uniform, and he had never known an instance of a Chair-
man being deposed and another appointed.—( Hear, hear.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought the House had
no right to controul the election of a Chairman in any of the
Committees. He agreed with the Right Hon. Gentleman
(Mr. Goulburn) that no Chairman could be deposed ; but if
he intimated Isis wish to resign, surely his resignation might be
accepted, and a new Chairman elected.—( Hear, hear.) You,
Sir (continued the Honourable and Learned Gentleman,
addressing the Speaker), are elected for this Parliament.
Your resignation, of course, would be deeply deplored,
—( Here a. very intelligible, and half-audible titter ran along
the Opposition benches)—but if you did resign, I apprehend
we should have no difficulty in electing a successor.—( Hear,
hear.) On the whole, he (the Attorney-General) thought
the new Chairman of this Committee was justly elected.—
( Hear, hear.)
Sir EDWARD SUGDEN rose to reply, but was inter-
rupted by the appearance of the Clerk of Committees at the
Bar with the reduced list of Committee on the
SHAFTESBURY ELECTION PETITION.

The names were called over in the following order, and
the Members sworn :—Lord Henniker, Francis Hart, Frede-
rick Paget, Lord Worsley, Hon. J. E. Elliott, Thomas Shep-
pard, C. W. Codrington, T. E. Winnington, James Blair,
W. S. Blackstone, and C. W. Packe.
CARLOW ELECTION COMMITTEE.
Sir E. SUGDEN again rose, and was for some time in-
terrupted by loud cries of " Spoke, spoke," from the Minis-
terial benches. He did not agree with the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman opposite (the Attorney-General) that the House
had no power over the acts of Election Committees.
Mr. MILDNIA Y rose to order, and Sir E. Sugden gave
way, when Mr. M. said he should move that witnesses be
heard at the bar to prove the illness of Lord Robert Grosvenor.
Sir E. SUGDEN resumed—The Attorney-General had
said that the House had no control over the proceedings of
Committees, even though they were contrary to an Act of
Parliament, and that such control was taken away from the
House by the Grenville Act. So long as the Committee con-
fined itself to the course marked out by the Grenville Act, the
House had not such control. But if the Committee went be-
yond the Act, the House had a superintending power, as, for
instance, if the Committee illegally elected a Chairman.
That the House had the power to enforce the provisions there
could be no doubt. If a Member was elected to serve on an
Election Committee, there could be no doubt that he was
bound to serve.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that
what was done in a Committee, the House could only refer
to by having before it the evidence that had been taken.
Mr. GOULBURN thought the matter deserving the
consideration of the House ; and any advice which could be
given by members who had had experience in the matter would
be very acceptable.—( Hear. )
Mr. NE ELD (we understood) said that when the Com-
mittee met they elected their Chairman under the Act. They
did that which they were authorised to do, and Lord Robert
Grosvenor consequently at this time stood as Chairman of the
Committee, and until a witness had been examined here, and
Lord Grosvenor excused from his attendance, he was still
Chairman.—( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. N.) entirely differed
from the Attorney. General in thinking that there was any
analogy between the election of Chairman under an Act of
Parliament and the election of the Speaker of the House.
The proper course would be to call to the bar Lord
Grosvenor's medical attendant, who could report as to
the state of his Lordship's health. If, on the report of
the medical gentleman, the House should be satisfied that lie
was unable to attend, he would he excused, and they must go
back to the election of another Chairman.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. Cameron, the medical attendant of Lord R. Grosvenor
was then called in, and, in answer to questions by the Speaker,
said—l saw Lord Grosvenor this afternoon. He is unfit to
execute his duties as a Member of the Committee. He labours
under severe indisposition, which would be aggravated by his
attendance on the Committee. He is confined to his house
to-dny, but not to his room.
The SPEAKER.—What is the nature of his indisposi-
tion? Witness—lt is an irritation of a nature that would be
aggravated. —( Oh 1 and laughter.)
The SPEAKER.—Do you think he will be able to attend
in two or three days 1 Witness.—l think not.
Sergeant JACKSON.—Are you of the medical profession ?

—Witness.—l am.
Sergeant JACKSON—Can you state what his complain'
is?—(Loud cries of " No, no," and much confusion,)
The witness was then ordered to withdraw.

Lord HOWICK thought it was very unusual to interfere
with the Speaker's examination of a medical gentleman. He
thought there was ample evidence before the House that the
Noble Lord was not able to attend. ( Oh, from the Opposition. )
He complained of the party feeling that had been shown—
( Ministerial cheers)—and he did not believe that any Gen-
tleman in that House would have carried that feeling to such
an extent.—( Renewed cheering.) When an honourable mau
stated that he was not able to attend, and when that state-
ment was confirmed on the oath of a medical prac-
titioner, he did not think any person would insist upon
carrying that examination further, and with a total disregard
of all delicacy-4 Vehement cheers and laughter)—press for
an enquiry into the nature of his complaint. He put it to the
good feeling of the House whether such a line of examination
should be persevered in ; and he for one objected to such a
question being put to the witness.—( Hear, and cheers.)
Mr. Sergeant JACKSON felt it to be his duty both to
himself and the House to say that he should be sorry to be de-
ficient in any point of delicacy—(Cheers)—but the public
ought to be satisfied upon a subject of that nature. He bad heard
the question he had asked put to the witness by the Speaker.
—( Cheers.) The question was not answered, and from his
short experience he was not prepared to say that any question
put from the Chair was not a fitting one.—(Loud cheers.)
If the Noble Lord were right that the word of an
Honourable Member ought to be taken, why then go
through the farce of swearing a witness at the bar, who
it appeared was called for the purpose of affording the
House no information whatever ?—( Cheers.) He threw him-
selt upon the House—they were to decide whether his con-
duct deserved the strictures of the Noble Lord. The public
were looking both anxiously and jealously at the proceedings
of the House upon such a question.—( Loud cheers from both
sides.) It was easy to impute party feelings upon any subject,
but he had never seen any party feeling on his (the Opposi-
tion) side of the House.—( Cries of " Oh, oh.") He repeated
it, he had never seen any, party feeling on his side of the
House on such questions. He was in the hands of the
House—they were to decide whether a question put from
the Chair was deserving of the censure it had met with.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said there could be no
doubt but, that if any Hon. Member insisted upon the ques-
tion being put it must be answered ; but would it not be
extremely disrespectful to the Noble Lord, and would it be
delicate to insist ?

Mr. G MILBURN would not have said one word upon the
subject had it not been for thelviolence of the Noble Lord
the Secretary at War.—(Cheers.) That Noble Lord charged
the Opposition side of the House with[deciding such a subject
upon party views and for party purposes. What bad that
side of the House to gain by the keeping of Lord Robert
Grosvenor on the Committee.—( Hear, hear, and loud cheers. )
If there were any party feeling upon the occasion, they would
be most anxious to facilitate his removal from the Committee,
because he saw the Noble Lord in the House the other night
when be gave his support to the Government—he had thought
then that the Noble Lord was in good health, and he was
sorry to find that it was otherwise. The Hon. Member
far Bandon had done nothing at all calculated to draw down
so much indignation as had fallen from the Noble Lord.

Lord HOWICK.—When I rose to dispute the propriety
of the question, I did not at all intend to impute party spirit
to the lion. and Learned Member for Bandon—(Laughter
from the Opposition)—but to put it to him if he had not
inadvertently asked a question which was not necessary.
What made me say anytning about party spirit was the shout
of denial and taunt which rung from one end of
those- benches to the other, when I said, " I am sure
the House will feel that this examination has been carried far
enough."—( Cheers. )
Sir R. INGL IS.—When the Noble Lord accused, in no
measured terms, this side of the House of party spirit,
I was one of those who called " Order ;" and it occurred
to me that he had accused you, Sir, at least as much
as us— ( Hear, hear);—and I rose with the intention—
humbly, and unnecessarily, I own—of protecting you against
the Noble Lord, who was cheered by the Gentlemen opposite
when he accused us of want of delicacy in persisting in a
question which had been twice put by you.—( Opposition
cheers.) If the Noble and Learned Lord retract the charge,
I say no more.—(Cries of " No, no," from the Ministerial
Benches.) If not, 1 call upon you, Sir, to desire that some
explanation may be given of the charge affecting the whole of
this side of the House.—( Laughter from the Ministerial
Benches.) Hon. Gentlemen who laugh may perhaps be re-
gardless of a charge of want of delicacy—if so, I congratulate
rather than envy them, but I desire that the Noble Lord
may state what he meant by charging us with want of delicacy.
Mr. WARBURTON had no doubt that the question as
put by the Speaker was strictly regular, but the hesitation
of the medical man in answering as to the nature of the disease
made him (Mr. Warburton) conceive that the gentleman
had a delicacy in stating what the disease was.—( Hear, hear. )
He did not at all object to the question being put. But from
the manner of the witness in answering it, he thought that it
was one which ought not to be pressed.
Mr. Sergeant JACKSON said that if he had had the

slightest notion that there was any objection to the question
being answered, he would not have pressed it.—( Hear, hexer. )
rdr: .MILDYI AY moved that Lord Robert Grosvenor'
should be irOrn farther attendance on the Carlow Elec-
tion Committee.
The question having been put, there were tittfißrous, " Ayes"
from the Reform Benches, and several loud cries Of "No,"
from the Tories. The question was again put, and answered
in the same manner. _ .

The SPEAKER asked did they mean to divide? And re-
ceiving no answer, declared the question carried in the affirma-
tive, and Lord Robert Grosvenor excused from further at-
tendance on the Committee.