The Sun.
London, England, 1831-06-22 00:00:00

LONDON, WEDNESDAY EV

treat diversity of opinion on the subject, he was appre-
hensive that if lie recommenced reacting the Address, he
again he stopped. Ate email tee no practical in.
convenience frsm his being allowed to read the Addres,
in the form in Which it bad h•ien ptit into hit bands._
Was it the pleasure of the House that he shonlead the

Address?
Lord ROLLE observed, that if the Address 'were so pro.
posed, no amendment to it could be made in proper terms.
Lord ELLENBOROVGH maintained the indispensible
necessity of adhering to the forms of the House, and of
propsing the motion in the third person.
Earl GREY must say that a more unprofitable discus.
sion he bad never listened to. He allowed that, in strict

accuracy, the motion ought to have been, not " Nis
Majesty's dutiful and loyal subjects," &e•, but " That a
dutiful and loyal Address be presented to his Msjesty," &c
"BLit what inconvenience could result from the present forM,
or how could it preclude the House from referriog the Ad-
dress to a Committee, he was at a loss to perceive. What-
ever error therewas, it was attributable tobis own inadvert-
ence. Not thinking there was coy difference one way Of
the other, be had recommended the present shape of the
Address to his Noble Friend. If the Noble Lord could
state pray practical inconvenience, any. injury to'tile privi-
leges and functions of their_ 'Lordships; Which would.
it7tidopllon of die es mt &O m, .it would be another.
matter ; but, otherwise, be put it to the character of the
Noble Lord, and still more emphatically to the character
of-the Illuse, whether it-was expedient to delay the consi-
&ration of the great question before them for a mere
paint of form. lie hoped, therefore, that his Noble and
Learned Friend would be allowed to read the Address in its

prcs( nt shape.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH deeply regretted the necessity
of the present di,cussion. He was as anxious as any of
their Noble L9rds could be to proceed with the important
buiiness of the evening. But he conceived it to be the duty
of every Noble Lord to at-Isere to the forms of the House—
forms founded in reason, and calcu'ated for the maintenance

of their privileges. He had no reason to (lout-it that the

Noble Earl had erred on this subject inadvertently. He had
no ectibt, also, that it was inadvertence on the part of
the Noble E to suffer the Noble and Learned Lord on

the Woolsack to commence reading his Majesty's Speech,
before their Lordships had considered any other measure.
Here were, however, two instances of inadvertence in one

evening. From such inadvertence precedeets might be
drawn, injurious to the privileges of that House, and
therefore injurious to the interests of the country. And
the present was certainly not the time when it became the
duty of any Peer to allow the privileges of the House to be
in the slightest degree diminished. He differed from the
Noble Earl as to the importance of the present discussion.
He believed considerable inconvenience might result from

the Noble Earl's inadvertence. On all former occasions it
was usual, in both Houses, to afford two opportu-
nities for voting—the one on the motion for the
Address, the other on the Address as prepared by
the Committee. The present form won't' prevent the
latter opportunity, as the two propositions would be iden-
tical. There was no precedent for such a course ; and it
might hereafter be rendered injurious to the public interest.
Trusting, however, that what had passed would prevent
the recurrence of what he believed was simply inadver-
tence, be would withdraw all opposition to the reading of
the Address.

The Duke of BUCKINGHAM observed, that another
error had occurred in the proceedings which had not
hitherto b-en adverted to. The Noble and Learned Lord
on the Woolsack had asked, whether it was their Lord-
ship,' pleasure that he should read the Address ? Now the
Noble Duke by whom it was moved, had a right that it
should be read.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE concurred with the
Noble Duke, that it was most undoubtedly the duty of the
Lord Chancellor, as a matter of course, to read any mo-
tion made to their Lordships.
The LORD CHANCELLOR observed, that the Speaker
of that House, alio had no real, but only nominal power,
Was y!cailiently pla;ed in ,1 situation of great alifficulty ;
having si many masters.-( laugh.) laugh.) When he began to
read lie was received with cries of " No no ;" followed by
as many cries of " Yes, yes !" It was easy to say that the
Address must be read ; but when there was such a diver-
sity of opinion, he must first ascertain the sense of their
Lordships on the subject. He admitted that it, might be
pernicious to allow a precedent to be established, although
that might be got over, if the terms of the motion, namely,
‘• the words following" were to be altered to " to the
following effect ;" and if their Lordships would allow him,
as he had no doubt, with their kind indulgence, he should
be enabled to do, to read the motion, converting it as he
proceeded into the third person. Was that their Lord-
ships' pleasure ?—(" Re d, read !" and " No, no.")
The Earl of CARNARVON observed, that that would
not be the Noble Duke's motion. The Noble and Learned
Lord could not alter the motion.
A NOBLE LORD remarked, that the Noble Duke who
made the motion should alter it.
Lord HOLLAND said, that his Noble and Learned
Friend did not pretend to alter the motion. All that he
asked permission to do was, in concert with the Noble
Duke, to put the motion in a shape more strictly conso-
nant to the fot ms of the House. It was undoubtedly more
consonant to the usages of the House that the motion for
the Address should lie in the third person.
Lord FARNHAM certainly thought that it would be
much better to allow the terms of the motion to be changed
from the first to the third person.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY rose, but before he
said anythiog,
Lord HOLLAND rose to order. If the Address was
to be altered, the most proper person to alter it was the
Noble Duke who moved it.
The Earl of ELDON read from the Journals a prece-
dent, which he considered applicable to the subject. The
Committee might change the phrase but not the sense.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY rose to make the
observation which he was about to make, when the Noble
Lord opposite called him to order, anti that observation
was, that it was most extraordinary that the Noble Lords
on the other side of the House should be so ready to blame
ofme
his Noble Friend (Eilenbarough) near him fur being eoo
andwere
order,
particular about a point of order, when they themselves
in the
raising course
objections
rse the last o sessionperpetually
ostfutile poi
calling
form. •
Lord HOLLAND—In the canons of literary criticism
it has been remarked that nothing is so unlike as a simile,
and it may perhaps be considered as a canon in Parliamen-
tary debating, that nothing is so disorderly as a debate
upon order—(Hear, hear)—and the Noble Marquis has
now carried the discussion to the very climax and summit
of disorder. He has contrived in the course of a sentence
to violate no less than three orders of the House. He has
adverted to what passed in a former debate, in a former
Session, and in a former Parliament. If this is permitted
by your Lordships to become a common practice, it will
destroy all respect for your proceedings.—(Hear, bear.)
The Duke of NORFOLK having altered the Address
from the first to the third person, handed it to the Lord
Chancellor to be read. It was accordingly read by his
Lordship, and was as usual an echo of the Speech.
The Earl of MULGRAVE rose to second the Address.
As to the observation made by the Noble Marquis (Lon-
donderry), he would, at the risk of incurring the indigna-
tion of his Noble Friend (Holland) behind him, venture.
to call to the recollection of the Noble Marquis, that
there was at one time in the course of last session a de-
gree of disorder in this House, which was by no means
calculated to keep up that deference and respect which
ought always to be preserved, if possible, for the manner
in which the proceedings of their Lordships' House were
conducted. He would say no more on that point, but he
hoped that the proceeding of this night would not turn
out to be only the first symptom of a frivolous and factious
opposition to his Majesty's Government.—(Hear, hear.)
A% for himself, there were two principles particularly
which be had considered it his duty to advocate as far as
lay in his power. The one was the principle of religious
liberty, or that of putting an end to all civil disabilities
depending on difference of creeds. He congratulated their
Lordships and the country, that a great Reform in that
respect had taken place, the consequence of which was,
that the Noble Mover of the Address had that seat among
them now which he ought to have had long ago. No one
who heard the Noble Duke could fail to sympathise with
him, when he made the touching, allusion to his want of
practice in Parliamentary speaking, which was the effect
of the unjust exclusion, and no one could help deploring
the cause of the Noble Duke's embarrassment when so
explained. It was a proof that the settlement of the
.Catholic question had been delayed too long. The other
principle to which he alluded was the great principle of
• sfficientitod sostinitial Reform in the represent3tire