The Sun.
London, England, 1809-05-19 00:00:00

DIVORCE;, DI LL.

Lord TanctiESTO roe, agreeable:to his nOtice of
a former evening, fur the purpose of Stating his:ob-
je6lions to the Standing Order in the. Divorce B;I1,
proposed by the Lords,. -On suche a subjed, he 1,4
a standing order created- great iticonventenc>'
-respell to the individuals,..and placed the 4-70a,mons
House in a situation which it bad newer Vlore stow
in. The forms sof proceeding -instituted by that
Honte.were the great guard of, ifs privileges. it
was f9r ,the Ho' K: to pronounce whether the Lords,
by tile intvoduaion of this Standing Order,,have not
some nleaSure trespassed on those privileges. ..the
Noble- Lord.strongly deprecated the want of delta Ist»
fercnce to the Commons fleuse in a ,ease ofavuris
gislatfve importance, 'it was, be said, in tie:-.1 utliy
is
.Committees.:that, this Clause could, be (~ Ly
them, and in such, a vvy callecl tOr their concur-,
reoce.with the Upper,lionse. , bins there' seesn«-
ea a great aticenaly in, making a O.4U.Se of a poUrc
nature with a priv4;e Bill affeaing individuals only.
The Lords, he said, had aded this 'manner to
meet the,reje4ion of the Constrion3, wls;eh on
Bill they experienced during,threse succe;ssive
It,Was not, he said, the duty of that Hon u to a sv,sit
the .coming down of a Bill on such an irnpostant"
subjed, and then only to oppose it, •If !Ls
mons had sent a Money Bill to the Upper H,onue,
containing any standinl order on the subje4t, how.
ever necessary it may be, it appeared fro n a reso.,
lotion in thelournals of the Lords that such a
would be reje6ted. , Here theis,.l., sa;d, vas a
_cadent for that House to act on, and put u't•
nals a resolution to the same etred, should lull 8,4
under the same circumstances be svtliniii ten by 11,e
Lords, to its Consideration. The Inusn,sis
Houses would warrant the pro' prietv oh a iputual
bciarch by. kith Commons and Lords, into slit sr re--
spetiiie orders, and there was nothing he Concevssil
whicliTin the nintion he should make, weel,; es ;:,.te
any ;Miniositieg. from the Upper House toW3TAS
Cororncins. The Noble Lord stron4iy rel,ssts,.;esi
the principle
.of the standing ordvr latcy
into the .Divorce. Bill. Those if:lU beinh' 1:1,1
been warped: by the arts of setluctiOn
the.operation of such an orders be reduced
would serial it, 408 species of Pisrliasneniary prii.ts-
tution. His LerdShip concluded by moving fur
appointment of a Committee to search thy .L3t.rnall
of the House Ot:LOMS for any proceediti4 in the Present Seision of Parliament, relatiog to a
.standing
order on the subjedt of Divorce Bills.
The CHANCELLoit of the Exotteourxdottidif tb,,t
the Ntaning...oeder adopted by the House -of i.drd:,
In the' Slightest degree, etrtrenehecl on the privileges,
of the Commons:. Even without .any, 'standing o';'.
der, -the Lord's had the right:to introduce into a
vorce bill a provision of a similar tendency 3' and yet-,
if the Noble Lord's. argument wetit "to any t !sing, it
went 'fo'deprive :t Lords_ of stiO a power. The
standing order- adopted '
.by the Lords only regulated
the mode in which Bills should he introduced Into
the House, and did not, regulate the turns in which
they should quit thenouse.. The Lords had not tf.)
lunch trenched on their 'own. privileges as to vid:;lare
that they would-deprive themselves of the pow,:s. of
rejecting any clause, although they declared; thy, ire
the first instance, they would, not eotertaiu a D.t 4stce
Bill 'without such a clause. As well rult;ltt the Lords
objed to soy regulation of:the House of Commons,
with respeot to the introdudion of a,,,Mong Bill, as
the Commons 61.);ta to any regUlation 01 the Hetise
of Lords with refine& to the intiodudion 01 a lii
vorce Bill. Ksch House of Parlitnent lid a ri,s la to
bake own rules on Oleiti
view of the snhject it appeared to hint' that them
was nu necessity for the appointtnent of
mince. s

Mr. I)oNsoNaT,‘Nished to know if the Standing
Order was :made, merely to: enable: the Lords to
tcratch out of every future Divorce 'Bill the'Clause;
without which they declared that no such Bill shOuld
be :introduced' ? Certainly not. It 'Was intended
that no Bill .Should go out, as well as Come in, with-
out sUch n olivise: The object of the Standing Or
der was to fOrce the;House of Commons to accept
or reject esiery future Divorce Bill with this
attached to it., The object of the step' taken by ibe
Lords was to impose a gaPeral measure .of legisla-
tion under the mask era Standing Order. It w447'a

inost unconstitutional mode' of proceeding, bight),
derog4tory (rain the piivilegea of the-Comilionl, ar.cl
which ought hi; hly to be reented by thinn.
The CkIANCEI./.011 Of tile ExpoEutlEtt explained.
iNfr. contot'aied, that there were good
grounds for the appoir.tment of '4 COLl'ltllittCa to 1.15,-
cert;iin.. how far the Standing Orde,r Of the Lords
trenched on the pi -I, lieges of the Comni,os. it rap.
peare4 to bun that it inte-rfered in the ~),t :t
nal dew-eq.: with the right of legisi,,:,
tiouse of Corruno..... Thft
be directly rmnedit.-,1;
pc:lient to 'n64 ti t
it)piC of legihitiutl, arid, -.1 4. ; t
ler,,teci, that On?' Noose of ,tit
from the other the. riittlit it. 4
Committee was furrlter tlwitr,,tl4lo 'that
it Was nosiiblo, the itaritti:i.diler mi4tit
to Bills entiving the' tiOtigC,4:4,itelfc fri,P4 t ht, COM.
ziS well as oue introdoted.
Mr. I.IATIIURT il.lt the
tier of the Lords would by. no ineaus preeL;;k ;110
!Commons from discussing the Merits of troy Dili or,o
Bill that might heocetnrward be sobronte„.l ;,.
It any difficulty should oi:cur, it, mould 1,411 on that
Lortii themselves; tAI them, as or;,;ioa!ing tliJ prin.
ciple alluded to, would fall the
etnbaritssment that might re,iult from it. It dit ,
considerable harm to excite jeithiusy,, where, vd,t, tr
ttie matter was fully:stated, no toundation for such a
feeling existed.

Ah. W. Wvt4tis-Viapported the prcspoiition or ills
Nt.otle - dnd jf tho S‘Andipir, Urdw svcro

t~-~.~

t

it whatever (particularly .sv ,ts !.ii,.out-,tble. to the
ttf the Sttintliiv,,: (,4(ler con(tivirtg
.as he did that each.ffou..o of hirliatnent td a r;ght
to make its proper regulations.; but. it anpearz:U)
him that the order applied , u.; con-Cing Item the
1-16us'e of Cpltllllol3, interierence in his opinion
flighty objetet.itr..ra-,;10..
• 4tr that'the merits of the
discussion dupe-n(10d (43 the piecikie tenor of •tho
so:lrking order, Hutt' therefore that it ought-to be 2s-
cettained by 3 Curtitnitt&. It unquestioitabir ap-
peared to him, that flit fit order pre-vented'
the entertaining in the liOnse of Lords of a Divorce
1111,.'.preceed whence it ruitlht, 'without the clau,se.
alluded to. .Advertiog.to au Act of tire first of Geo:1
I, cap. 4, with rispect to the natnriilization of fa.
J'eitinero he conipared a clause in th:ft Att-Witit' the
.• ,
standing eruct under discussion, and 'contended,
in either •Ano:e it was absurd to se}-, that the
Lore;.s intended to declare that wild! should not bit.
imii.3l:‘,ol without certain clauses, 'Merely that they
tttigbt uhhrotely sit ike those clauses out of the 1,1i11.:
it could not be disputed that the House of Lords
in this iostatice,' very ilnproperly assumed the
iii4lw.Of'sole Ic gislatititi.. In saying all this, he
beg ecl not to be understood as denying that a law
founded on the principle.of the standing order, was
highly desirable.
IVIr. H. Sstrrn 'deprecated the injury to which
intik idual parties might be subject by a difference, of
dpioion•between the two douses of Parliament on
an abatratt question.' With' a view of..giving an
opportunity for an assimilation of their sentiments,
lie should vote for the Motion of the Noble Lord.

Mr. HAWKINS BROWNE observed, that although
the 'Lords, by their
.Standing Order; declared that
they would not receive a •flivorce Bill. •without.• a
Clause tb prevent the guilty parties from intermarry-
ing, they had not declared that they would not re-
ecive such a Bill from the House,of Commons. It
was fairly to be presumed That they meant to confine
theintluence of their Order to Bills originating in
their own !louse. Conceiving that the Noble Lord
!rid not made out any breach of the privilege's of
the House, as having been attempted by the LoidS,
he should give, his negative to the motion.
Mr. nititHAll could not conceive that the Lords
would have been so. foolish as to make a Standipg
Order ithout intending that it should have its ef-
fzot. That purposed, etfect appeared to him evi-
d.einly to be, that no Divorce should pass them
' without a. clause as the one alluded t 0... Ift
however, their object Were conned to preveritthe
introdualari merely of `a: avoicr Bill, withaq: flit;
clause in oueYttion, still Ire Conceived that thes,ttep
taken by thern washignly objefidnable. Adverting
to the principle of the Statrdttrp order- he
pressed his disapprobatiiiti of ii, ,and"'his conviaion
that it would not cuntribute to the cause of mora-
lity.
After a short reply frOtn Lord PORCHEYTER, and
a few word; from Mr. G. Jolittsoryih laiiCitit of tho
Motion, a diviston took place.
For the motion .....
'Against it
Majority agalas the Committee —24
Mr. H. MAKTIN, in cOnsequence of an Ultima-
tion conveyed to no, that u was the
intention al the Right Hon. -pew letn.in opposite to
propose the subiti:ntion of tvvo Resolutions t;f his
own for the Re4oltitions "which he 01r. H. Martin)
bad intended to submit to the blouse to.imarlow,
and as this intimation came upon him
,by surprise,
expressed his.wish topostpone the consideration of
those Resolutions until -I"nocsday Week.
The CHANCELLOR ofthe.EXCEIEQUOR concurred
in opinion with. then. Hon. Gentleman as to the pro-
. Friel of deferring the consideration or the itesohi-
tions and it was agreed Altar:they should be re-
ceived to.morrow proforma, printed, and discussed
on Tuesdoy.seitinight.