The Sun.
London, England, 1838-03-29 00:00:00

Mr-. HUME asked what had become of the prosectttion
which the Lord Advocate had been desirtd to histiatte against
Lord Dunglas, to divest him of a sineeuro.
The LORD ADVOCAT
F. said it was still pending.
SHEFFIELD:
Mr. LASCELLES ni,11.71 co put a question to the Noble
Lord the SePretat4 of the Home Dzpartment. Two peti-
tion: had been presented to the Privy Ccuntil from the
borough of Sheffield, P 71,, ..3,gt-Itil by 3,000 householders
in favour of a Ctirpn.ration, and one signed by 15,000
cut of 01.0 i 2,000 householders; agains,t the (int'po'ration.
rot ort'e reason no decision tviO, tome to, and a Mr. Jebb
was sent down as a commissioner, to make enquiries.
Now he (Mr. L-.scelles) wished to he informed why,
1111,-,,n the inhabitants had expressed so decided an opinion,
no decision had been come to, and what necessity there was

for sending Mr. Jebb down to make further inquiry ?
L^rd J. RUSSELL said, when the cpiestion of the Bir-
n.ingham Corporation was before the Committee, they found
great difficulty in coming to a correct statement as to the number
of householders, in con.equence of which two persons were sent
itcwn to ascertain the facts to enable the Privy Council to come to
a decision at their next meeting. With regard to Sheffield, on
the two petitions being received, the parties were asked whe-
ther they admitted that 15,000 householders had signed the
petition against the formation of a Corporation. They
denied that fact, and the Privy Council thought they would
not be justified in coming to a decision without making
farther inquiry, and Mr. Jebb was therefore sent to Sheffield.
When his report should be made, the Privy Council should
decide the matter. With regard to the expenses they must
1)2 considered as public extracts.
Lord JOHN RU SSE LL, in answer to a question by
an Honourable Member, as to when the Bill for the
alteration of Committee Courts would be in the hands

of Honourable Members, replied that he hoped to pre-
sent it two or three days before the adjournment.
The Noble Lord then gave notice that the Under Secretary
for the Colonies, when the motion was made to-morrow for
the abolition of apprenticeship in the Colonies, would move as
an amendment the Order of the Day for the second reading
of the Bill for the amendment of the Abolition Act, which was
read a first time last night.
On the motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL, the Mutiny
Bills were read a third time and passed.
ADJOURNED DEBATE.
The SPEAKER having gone through the Paper—and the
Bills having been postponed for the purpose of resuming the
adjourned debate upon the Spanish question—formally read
the resolution moved by Lord Eliot.
No one having risen to commence the debate,
The SPEAKER put the question. Both sides answered
the appeal—the Tories Aye, and the Liberals No. The
Speaker declared that the Noes had it, amidst loud laughter,
and cries of " Divide."
The gallery was cleared. The House divided, when there
appeared—
For the Motion 62
Against it
Majority for Ministers —a
On our re-admission to the gallery we found the House in
a state of excitement, the Liberals loudly cheering, and
Lord MAHON asking whether the late division had not
been had from a misunderstanding upon both sides of the
House ?—( No, no, and much laughter. )
Lord JOHN RUSSELL—The only thing I feel called
upon to say is, that there could be no intention on either side
of the House to act unfairly ; as to any further course to Ire
adopted, with that I have nothing to do.—(Loud laughter
from the Ministerial benches.)
Lord M:1 HON asked if it was not competent to put the
resolution again, and remarked that there was a natural re-
luctance on his side of the House to divide in the absence of
the Noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, upon
whom the motion implied a severe censure.—(" Oh, oh,"
from the Ministerial Benches.)
General Sir DE LACY EVANS said that was mistaken
delicacy, inasmuch as the attack was directed against him.—
(" Hear, hear," from the Ministerial benches ; and " No, no,"
from the Opposition.) He bad intended to speak to-night, but
had refrained because he concluded that some Member on the
opposite side of the House would have wished to answer the
powerful speech made by Mr. Sheil at the close of the debate
last night.--( Hear, hear.) The debate on this motion had a
very singular commencement, and a ridiculous termination.—
(Loud laughter and cheers from the Ministerial Benches.)
Lord FRANCIS EGERTON then rose, but was re-
ceived with loud cries of " Order 1" from the Ministerial side
of the House.
An HON. MEMBER wished to ask if there was any question
before the House?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that as there was no
question before the House he would move that the Orders of
the Day be now read.
Lord F. EGERTON conceived that he was perfectly in
order. He begged to say that for his part he was totally un-
aware that the question had been put, as he believed was
also the Noble Lord opposite. The Hon. and Gallant Officer
was in error in supposing that the motion was directed against
him personally, as it was nothing more than the usual Parlia-
mentary attack made by one side of the House upon the other.
The SPEAKER said, that he had taken the Orders as they
stood on the paper, and thatno blame could be attached to him.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that, as there was no ques-
tion before the House, he would move that the Housei
do now adjourn.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear, hear," an&
a general rush of Members to the door. )
The SPEAKER was about to put the question of adjourn-
ment, when
Lord MAHON rose, and put it to the House whe-
ther it was right that a question of such importance should
be disposed of in this summary manner. The division had
been totally unexpected, and Members had not time to ar-
rive. He therefore proposed, if it were not inconsistent with the
rules of the House on the amendment that the House do now
adjourn, the identical motion which was previously before the
House.—( Cheers from the Opposition, and laughter from the
Ministerial benches.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL asked the Speaker if that would
be in order ?
The SPEAKER was understood to reply in the negative.
Mr. HAWES said the Noble Lord opposite had talked of being
taken by surprise ; but if any party had been taken by surprise,
it was the Members on this (the Ministerial) side of the House,,
who hardly knew how to act under the circumstances, for the;
division had been forced on them by Hon. Members opposite.:
—(Cries of " No, no.") They had a right to expect that the
next speaker would rise on the other side—( Loud cheers)
—and he was greatly surprised on hearing Gentlemen
say the Ayes had it. If there were any fault in the case it did
not lay on this side of the House.
Mr. GO ULBURN certainly said the Ayes have it, when
he heard the other side say the Noes have it. An Hon. Gen-
tleman on this side of the House had undertaken to open
the debate, but was unfortunately absent when the accident
occurred.—( Loud laughter from the Ministerial benches.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said it was naturally expected
that some Gentleman would rise on the other side, after the
brilliant speech delivered last night by the Hon. Member fon
Tipperary. The whole proceedings were entirely unintentional
and no pasty was to bleme.—( Hear, hear.)
The SPEAKER said no imputation could be cast upot
him, as he had put the question fairly to the House, and n
one had risen.
Mr. GO ULB URN did not make the least imputation o
the Speaker who had put the question once. —( Several
Members on the Ministerial side of the House exclaimed
" Twice.")
Lord ELIOT had certainly intended by his motion to cast
censure upon the Government with respect to their policy
towards Spain, and if possible to elicit such an
expression of the feeling of the House as might induce
the n to change it. It was impossible that a question
of such importance could be got rid of in such a manner ;
end he trusted that the debate would he allowed to go on
upon the question of adjournment, or that the same motion
with some verbal amendment might be allowed to be put.
Colonel DA VIES said the question had been entirely
disposed of, and cited a case of a similar nature which
occur rd when the question of Parliamentary Re-
form was before the House. Besides, the House had
decided the question upon two different occasions last Session
of Parliament. The question had been fairly put and fairly
decided, and if the Noble Lord wanted a trial of strength
between the two parties, let him give a new notice of motion.
Mr. MILNE S thought it would be better to continue the
debate on this occasion, than waste the time of the country by
renewing the debate afresh at a future period.
Mr. M. O'CONN ELL said it would be a bad precedent
to set, to bring forward a motion agaia--after it has been de-
cided upon by the House—by melting a verbal alteration in
it.—( Hear.)
Sir R. PEEL said he had been taken as much by surprise
RS any Member. An Honourable Member bad waited upon
him, and told him that he had intended to open the
debate, and never was he (Sir R. Peel) so astonished as
when on coming down to the House he found that the debate
had gone off. He thought the Noble Lord (Palmerston)
would himself insist upon the House coming to a more
definite decision upon this question than could be inferred
from a chance division upon an incomplete discussion.—( Hear,
hear.) Either the debate might be continued now, or upon
the earliest convenient day.
Mr. C. BULLER said if the question were one of
really practical importance, it might be . desirable for
the House to come to a definite decisiOn upon it;
but the fact was, it was a mere party question brought forward
by gentlemen opposite, with the view Of turning out the
Ministry—( Cheers from the Ministerial benches)—and ho
for one should object to giving the other side any facility for
renewing the debate upon such a mere empty vote of censure
which could have no practical effect whatever.—( Hear, hear.)
By the bye, he should like to know the name of that Member
who was to have commenced the debate upon the Opposition
side of the House at five o'clock, and whom the Right Hon.
Baronet (Sir R. Peel), with such bad taste, had purposely
avoided, by coming down at half-past five o'clock. —( Laughter. )
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that it was certainly rather
unfortunate that the lion. Member who had intended opening
this debate had not arrived until five o'clock, when the divi-
sion had taken place, and that the Right Hon. Gentleman who
had moved the vote of censure on Ministers had not arrived
until half an hour after his usual time.—( Hear, hear, and
laughter.) With respect to the question itself, lie
partly agreed with and partly disagreed with what had
fallen from his Hon. Friend, who had just sat down.
He did not think the question as regarded the Order in Council
was of such importance as to justify the re-opening of the de-
bate; but with respect to the other part of the motion,
which involved a vote of censure on the Government,
he thought that this could not be considered as a question
merely affecting parties, but as one which was of considerable
importance not only to this country but to Spain.—( Hear,
hear.) He certainly thought that it would be an unfor-
tunate precedent to set: if the debate were again opened