The Sun.
London, England, 1849-05-23 00:00:00

NEW WRIT.

On the motion of Mr. NEWDEGATE a new writ
was ordered to issue for the election of a Member for
South Warwickshire, in the room of Mr. Shirley who
has accepted the Chiltern Hundreds.
POOR RELIEF.
Lord NUGENT said he would, on an early day, move
for a Committee to inquire into the pucticability of
charging the relief of the destitute poor in Englund and
Wales on the general funds of the country.

- PRIVATE BILLS.
The reports on the following private Bills were taken.
into consideration, and agreed to:—
Birkenhead, Lancashire, and Cheshire Junction Rail-
way (Abandonment of Part of Line, Extension to Lon-
don and North Western Railway, &c.) Bill.
Cockermouth and Workington Railway (Branch to
Bridgefoot, Amendment of Act, and Power to lease to
Whitehaven Junction Railway Company) Bill.
Congleton Inclosure Act Amendment Bill.
TIIE DERBY DAY.

The Marquis of GRA.NBY rose to move that this
House will, at the rising of the House of this day, ad.
journ till Thursday neat. lie thought it would be unne-
cessary to cxll:i.ti the object with which he brought for-
ward that nrotion.--(A. laugh.) It had been an immemorial
cu teen for the House to adj,m; n on the day usually
called the Derby-clay, for the purpose of taking part, or
so many of the Members as eho,e to do so, in a great
national recreation. Ile would remind the Reuse,
as an .tidditioncl reason for agreeing to his tnotr.ni,
-tslfus---4hey had been deprived this year of one
of their holidays by reason of her Dlsjesty's
birth-day falling on a Saturcluy.—(l,tighter.) Besides,
there were officers beloug,iog to the 'louse who wanted
to go and see the Derby run for.

S—:r GEORGE GREY said, tor his part, he was not
prepared to vote in favour of the motion unless there was
a general wi,h fur the adjournment on the part tf the
House.

Mr. AGLIONBY (amid loud cries of "Divide")
protested tigairn,t the !louse adjournii,g over to-morrow,
inasmuch as he had a very important Bill for the en-
franchis:-Inent of copy holds to briirg beture the House
tu• morrow, ivhich had several times already been post-
poned.
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD took the same view
of the motion as the Hon. Member for Coekermouth.

After a few words from Mr. ANSTEY, who would
vote in favour of the motion,
Mr. REYNOLDS said it was not his intention to op-
pose this motion, unless he gut a satisfactory answer
from the First Lord of the Treasury to a question he
would ask. It was quite clear-that the Hon. Member for
Cockermouth had not "made up a book"—
(Laughter)—and that " Chatterer" was no favourite
in that House.—(Laughter.) Ile deeply regretted that
the Hon. Member for Ceckermouth had not made up
a book" for this, among other reasons, that Chatterer
was an Irish horse.—(Laughter.) He would ask the
Members of the Government if they were going
to the Derby?—(Laughter.) In that event he would
most cordially vote fur the motion.
The gallery was then cleared for a division, and on our
re-admission there app'.ared—
_
•

For the motion
Against it
...,

... 138
... 119

Majority .•• --19
The result was received by a portion of the House
with great cheering.
Mr: LABOUCLIERE moved that the Committees
have leave to sit to -morrow, notwithstanding the ad-
journment of the House.
After a few words from Mr. AGLIONBY,
The motion was agreed to without a division.
DURATION OF PARLIAMENTS.

Mr. D'EYNCOURT rose to move for leave to bring in
for shortening the duration of Parliaments. The
Right Hon. Gentleman, who was very indistinctly heard,
said there was scarcely a meeting of any importance held
in this country where the proceedings or conduct of that
House were discussed, in a hich the question of shorten-
ing the duration of Parliament, and thereby increasing
the responsibility of the Members of the Mouse of Com-
mons, had not been made matter of deliberation. H a
trusted he would not be charged with impropriety a;
instead of waiting the result of agitation, he thought'
preferable course was to bring this question before the
House now.—(Hoar, hear.) It was a question whiel at
the time of the Revolution of 1688 occupied a cues tiler-
able share of attention ; and in the Bill of Rights 'A was
declared to be the right of the people of Englar that
Parliaments should frequently assemble. In 1.694 the
question was brought more into shape, and the 'triennial
Act passed, though, as he would afterwards. show, un-
necessarily repealed. It could not be sit that this
question had been pressed unncessartly; on ',he contrary,
he had been blamed for being too lax regty ding it. He
had suffered two Parliaments to go by wrihour bringing
it forward, precisely for the same reason that the people
had during that period not
.petitionel use House on the
subject, viz., because they did not believe there. was any
disposition on the part of Parliament give a favour-
able consideration to the proposal. Whether the pre-
sent Parliament would show a more fe vourable disposi.
tion remained to be seen ; and thcrerore, atter a period
of twelve years, he had deemed it his duty to bring it
torward as a question, of public right.—(l-lear, hear.)
By "public right ' he meant that Parliaments should
not continue longer than was sufficient to secure thei
responsibility to the people.—(Bear.) Formerly Vie
people of this country enjoyed by practice and by ha bit
sessional Parliaments. That habit and practice ebn.
tanned up to the time of the Tudors and Stuarts, Ishee
there took place a gross usurpation on the part (,f the
Crown.' In 1694, as he had already stated, the Tfiennial
Act was passed, being intended to secure the ' country
from the disadvantages that nad flowed from t,lie Long
Parliaments. The preamble of that Bill recolpised fre-
quent Parliaments as warranted by the ancient law of
the kingdom. It continued in operation 10'.. twenty-two
years, and he believed there were no statu ces that more
adorned the statute-book, or had greater regard to the
diguity of Parliament and the liberties of the people,
than those passed during this period. But the Rebel-
lion of 1715 was made a pretext for putting an end to
the Triennial and passirg the Septennial Act, for it
was supposed that at the next election an attempt
would be made on the part of those who supported
the cause of the Petender to return men who wouldenw
deavour to change the dynasty, and restore the Stuarts.
The passing of the Septennial Act, he contended, was a
complete coup 'fetal—an act of revolution; because, no-
thing could be more outrageous than that a Parhument
elected for three years should vote its own continuance
for seven years. He then proceeded to show that the
main grounds assigned for its passing were unjustifiable
—viz., that triennial Parliaments occasioned greater ex-
pense than septennial; and that they were destructive of
the peace and security of
.Government. These were
mere pretexts. The Septennial Act, however, became
the law of the bind, and so aisgusted did the people of
England become with its working, when they found the
great difference there was between the conduct of their.
representatives under it and their conduct under the
Triennial AO, that II motion for it, repelll wo,/ mule is