The Sun.
London, England, 1836-05-05 00:00:00

LONDON, THUIZSDAY EVENING, MAY 5. 1836.

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS.

From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons.)
TUESDAY, MAY 3.
STRANGERS' GALLERY.

Resolutions (28th July 1835) from Select Committee, am:oil-Ile:.
to consider the bcst means of setting apart and adapting a por-
tion of the Strangers' Gallery for the admittance of Ladies dur-
ing the Debates of this House, read—Motion made, and Ques-
tion put—" That it is the opinion of this House, that the Reso-
lution of the Select Committee of 1835 on the Ladies' Gallery ,
be adopted."—The HOUR" divided :
MAJORITY—AYES, 132.

Aglionby, H. A.
A tchdall, Mervyn
Dagshaw, John
Baldwin, Dr.
Bai ing, H. B.
atrnard, E. G. .
Bateson, Sir'll.
Fcaumont, T. W.
Berkeley, *F. F.
Berkeley, C.
Blab, T.
Blunt, Sir C.
Bowes, T.
Bow ring, Dr.
Brady, D. C.
Bridgman, Hewitt
Bremerton, J.
Brudenell, Lord
Buckingham, J. S.
Buller, C.
Burden, \V.
Butler, Hon. P.
Campbell, Sir H.
Caylcy, E S.
Chapman, M. L
Chapman, A.
Chetwynd, W
Chichester, Arthur
Codrington, C. W.
Coote, Sir C.
Cowper, \V. F.
Crawford, \V. S.
Dick, Q.
Divett, E
C.
Dondas, J. D.
Eaton, Richard J.
Eney, Sir J.
Etwall, R.
Pancourt, C. S. J.
Feetor, John Minet
Ferguson, Sir It. A,
Fergusson, R. C.
Forbes, W.
French, F.
Freshfielcl, J. W.

Gaskell,
Gaskell, J. M.
Gisborne, T.
Gore, W. 0.
Gorrburn, Serjeant
Grote, G.
Guest, J.
Gully, J.
Hale, It.
Halford, H.
Harland, \V. C.
Harvey, D. W.
Hay, Sir A. L.
Henniker, Lord
It indley, Charles
Hogg, J. \V.
Ilorsman E.
Hume, Joseph
Hutt, W.
Jackson, J. D.
Jones, Wilson
Kemp, 'l'.
Knightley, Sir C.
Law, Hon. G.
Lawson, A.
Lister, E. C.
Lowthkr, J. H.
Maclean, D.
Manners, Lord C.
Molesworth, Sir W.
Mullins, F. W.
Musgrave, Sir R.
Nagle, -ir It
O'Brien, \V. Smith
O'Co-nrell, D.
O'Conneil, J.
O'Connell, M. J.
O'Connell, Morgan
O'Connor Don
Oliphant, L.
Parrott, J.
Parry, Sir Jones
l'ease, Joseph
Pechell, Captain
Perceval, Colonel

Pinney, W. 1
Plumptre, J. P.
Plunkett, R.
Polhill, F.
Potter, It.

Poultir, J. S.
Power, J.
Price, S. S G.
Prynae, U.
Richards, J. )
Robinson, G. R.',
Roche, D.
Roebuck, J. A.
Ruthreu E.

Scliolefield, J.
Scott, Sir E. ..
Scourtiehl, W. IV
Sibthorp, Colonel
Smith, B.

Smyth, Sir H.
Strickland, Sir G.
Stuart, Lord Dudley
Surrey, Elrl of
Talbot,

Talfou'rd, T.N.
Tennent, J. E.
Thomas, Celoncl
Thompson, Coloucl
Trevor, Hon. A.
Tulk, C. A. •
Twiss, Horace
Vivian, C. C.
Wikley, Thomas
Wason, It.
Whalley, Sir S.
White, S.
Wilkins, %V.

. -
William., W.
Williams, W. A.

Williams'on, Sir H.
Wood, Alderman
Young, Sir W. L.

TF.LLERS.
Berkoley, Hon. G.
Forester, Hon. C.

Baillie, H. D.
Baines, E.
Balfour, T.
Baring, F.
Baring, T.
Barry, G. S.
Bentinck, Lord W.
Bettiell, R.
Bolling, W.
Bonham, F. R.
Brainston, T. W.
Buller, Sir J. B.
Cavendish, C.
Cavendish, G. H.
Chalmers, P.
Chandos, Marquis of
Chaplin, T.
Childers, J. W.
Churchill, Lord C.
Clerk, Sir G.
Clive, R. H.
Colborne' Ridley
Conolly, Colonel
Crawley, S.
Curteis, E. B.
Dillwyn' L. W.
East, J. Buller
Eastnor, Viscount
Egerton, Lord F.
Ellice, Rt. Hon. E.
Evans, G.
Fort, John
Goulburn, H.

:NORITY—NOES,
Grimston, Viscount
Halle, James
Hastie, A.
Heathcoat, J.
Hill, Sir Rowland
Hodges, T. L.
Hope, Hon. J.
Hotham, Lord
Howie It, Lord
Ingham, h obert
Inglis, Sir R. H.
Kearsley, J. H.
King, E.B.
Knatchbull, Sir E.
Lefevre, C. S.
Lefroy, Dr. T.
Lennox, Lord G.
Lincoln, Earl of
Mackinnon, W. A.
M'Leod, M.
Manners, Lord C.
Marjoribanks, S.
Marsland. T.
Maule, Hon. Fox
Morgan, C. M. R.
North, F.
O'Ferrall, More
Palmer, General
Parker, M. E. N.
Pendarves, E. W.
Pigot, Robert
Rickford, W.
Rooper, J. B.

Russell, Lord C. J. F.
Russel!, Lout John
Russell, Charles
Ryle, John
Sharpe, General
Sheldon, E. R. C.
Smith. Vernon
Somerset, Lord E
Spiers, Alexander,
Steuart, R.
St rutt, Edward
Stuart, Lord James
Stunt, H. C.
Trelawney, Sir W.
Trevor, Hon. G. R.
Turner, W.
Vere, Sir C. B.
Vesey, Hon. T.
Vivian, J. H.
Walker, R.
Wallace, R.
Walpole, Lord
Walter, J.
Warburton, H.
Weyland, Major
Wood, C.
Wood, Colonel T.
Wynn, C. W.
Young, J.

TELLRES.
Villiers, Charles
Methuen, P.

LIEUT.-COLONEL LORD BRUDENELL.
Motion made, and Question proposed—" That a Select Committee
be appointed, to inquire into the conduct of the Commander-in-
Chief of the Forces, in appointing Lieutenant-Colonel Lord
Brudenell to the Second Lieutenant-Colonelcy of the 11th Light
Dragoons "—(Sir William Molesworth)—Lord Brudenell was
heard in his place ; and then he withdrew—Question put—The
House divided :

Aglionby, H. A.
Attwood,
Baring, F.
Barnard, E. G.
Bish, T.
Bowring, Dr.
Brady, Denis C.
Bridgeman, Hewitt
Broeklehurst, J.
Protherton, J.
Buller, C.
Crawford, W. S.
Divett, E.
Dundas, J. C.
Ewart, W.

Adam, Admirtl Sir C.
Agnew, Sir A.
Alford, Lord
Atsagcr, Richard
Alton, R.
Angerstein, John
Arbuthnot, Hon. H.
Archdall, General
Ashley, Lord
At t wood, M.
L'agot, lion. W.
Baillie, H. D.
Baldwin, Dr.
Balfour, T.
Barclay, David
Barclay, C.
Baring, F. T.
Baring, H. B.
Baring, W. B.
Baring, T.
Barry, G. S.
Bateson, Sir R.
Becket, Sir John
Bell, M.
Bentinck, Lord G.
Beresford, Sir J.
Berkeley, F.
Berkeley, Granville
Berkeley, C. F.
Bernal, It.
Bethel', It
Blackburn, John I.
Blackstone, W. S.
Boldero, Henry G.
Bolling, W.
Bonham, Francis R.
Bradshaw, James
Bram,ton T. \V.
Bruce, ard E.
Bruce, C. L. C.
Bruen, Colonel H.
Bruen, F.
Bulwcr, E. G. E. L
Burrell, Sir C. M.
Butler, Hon P. S.
Byng, George
Byng, Hon. G.
Calcraft, J. H.
Campbell, Sir 11.
Canning, Sir S.
Castlereagh, Viact.
Cayley, E. S.
Chalmers, Patrick
Chandos, Marquis of
Chaplin, T.
Chapman, A.
Chichester, A.
( bilders, J. W.
Churchill, Lord C. S.
CI yton, Sir W.
Clive, E. B.
Clive, Robert
Codrington, C. W.
Colborne; N. W. li. '
Cole; Lord
Compton H. C.
Conelly,
Conyngtiam, Lord A.
Coote, Sir C.
Corbett, T. G.
Cowper, Hon. W. F.
Crawley, S.
Cripps, J.
urteis, E. B.
D'A 'bin, Sir C.
Dalineny, Lord
Darlington, Elul of
Dillwyti, L. Vl,.
Donkin, Sir R.
Dowdeswell. \V. E.
Dugdale, W. S.
Dunbar, George
Duncombe, 'l% S.
Duncombe. A.
Dundas, T.
Duiukv, J. D.
East, James Buller
l'...astnor. Viscount
Eaton, It. J.
Egerton, W. T.
Egerton, Sir P.
Egerton, 1.,:.rd Fran. •
Elley, Sir J.
Ellice, E.
Elwes, J. P.
Estcoutt, T. G. B.
EAcourt, T. S. B.
Fancourr, Major
Fector, John Minet
Feilden, W.
Ferguson, Sir R. A.
Ferguson, G.
Fergusson, It. C.
Finch, G.
I itzroy, Lord C.
Fleming. J.
Foley, E. T.

.JORITY--NOES,
Fo".kes, Sit W.
Forbes, W.
Forester, Hen. C.
Forster, C.
tort: John
Fremantle, Sir 'l'.
Freshfield, J. W.
Gasket!, J. M.
- (~Geary, -Sir W.
Lisburne, I'.
Gladstone, P.
Gladstone, W.
Glynne, Sir S.
Goodricke, P. L. H.
Gordon, R.
Gordon, Hon. W.
Gore, W. 0.
Goulburn, H
()Oldham, Mr. Serjt.
Graham, Sir J. R. (1.
Grant, F. W.
Greisley, Sir R.
Grey, sir G.
Granston, Lord
Hale, Robert B.
Haltbre, H.
Halse, J.
_Hamilton, Lord C.
Hardinge, Sir H.
Harland,. %v.
Harvey, 1). W.
Hastie, A.
Hawes, B.
Hawkes, T.
Hawkins, .1. 11.
Hay, Sir J.
Hay, Sir A. L.
Hayes, Sir E.
Heathcote, G J.
Heneage, G. E.
Henniker, Lord
Hill, lord Arthur
Hill, Sir R.
Hothouse, Sir J. C.
Hodges, P. L.
Hogg, .1. W.
Hope, Hon J.
Hope, H. I.
Hotham, lord
Houltisworth, T.
Howard, It.
Howard, E.
Howard, P. 11.
Howick, Lord
tioy, J. 13.
Hurst, It. H.
Hntt, W.
Ingham, Robert
Inglis, Sir It. H.
Jackson, Serje..iit
Jones, Wilson
Jones, T. •
Johnstone, J.. 1. H.
Keathley, J. It
Kerrison, Sir E.
Knatchbull, Sir E.
Knight, H. G.
Knightley, Sir C.
Knox, Hon. J.
Labouchere, 11.
I.aw, Hon C.
Lawson, A.
Lee, J. L.
Lefroy, A.
Lefroy, Dr.
Leitnox, Lora G.
Lewis D.
Lincoln, Earl of
Loch, J.
Lopez, Sir R.
Lowther, H. C.
Lowther, J. 11.
Lucas, E.
Lushiagron, S. R
Lygon, Colonel
Mackinnon, W. A.
Maclean, 1).
M`Leod, It.
Mangles, J.
Marine's, Lsrtl C.
Marjorib..liks, S.
Marsland,
Martin, J.
Maule, Hon. Fox
Arlaunsell, T. P.
Methuen, I'.
Meynell, IL
Miles, W.
Miles, I'. J.
Mordautt, Sir J.
Morpeth, k istotint
Mosle%' Sir 0.
Neeld, Joseph
icholl, J
Norreys, Lord
O'Connor Don
Oliphant' 1,.
Packc, C. W.

VT MEMBERS
posed the second read-
rdens for the people;
rughes, the House was
Bills on the orders of
liged to be deferred to

LIST OF THE THIRTY-EIG.
Who were in the House when Mr. Tooke opi
ing of the Bill for Public Walks and Gar
and when on the motion of Mr. Hughes
counted out, there being then 23 public
the day, all of which were by this step obl
some future day.
Aglionhy, H. A.
Agnew, Sir A.
Baines, E.
Barnard, E. G.
Bowring, Dr.
Bowes, .1.
Brotherton, J.
Buckingham, J. S.
Hindley, C.
Ilughes, H.
Knight, H. G.
Law, Hon. C.
Lushington, C.

Roche. I).

Roebuck, .1. A.
Ruthven,
Scholetield, J.
Strutt, E.
Thompson, T. P.
Thornely. 'l'.
Villiers, C. P.
Wakley, Thomas
Wallace, R.
Warburton, H.
Wilbraham, G.
TELLERS.
Mol sworth, Sir W.
Hume, Joseph

Paget. r.
Palmer, General
Palmer, R.
Palmer: ton, Lord
Parker, M.
Parker, J.
Parnell, Sir H.
Parrott, J.
Parry, Sir I P. J.
Patten, Wilson
Nei, Sir It
Peel, W. Y.
Pemberton, T.
Perceval, Ctlonel
Pigot,
Pinney, W.
Plum ptre,
Plunkett, Hon R. E.
I'owell, .1.
Praed, W. M.
Price, Samuel Greve
Pringle, A.
Pusey, P.
Rae, Sir W.
Reid, Sir J. R.
Rice, T. S.l
Richards, John
Rickford, W.
Itirlk..y, Sir M. W.
Rolfe, Sir R. it.
Rooper, J. Bonfoy
Ras:, C.
Rushbrooke, Colonel
Russell, Lord John
Russell, Lord Charle
Ryle, J.
Sanderson, R.
Scarlert, Hon. It.
Scott, Sir E
Scott, .1. W.
Scourtield, W. 11.
sey Lord
Sharpe, General
Shaw, F.
Sheldon, E.
Sheppard, 'l'
Sibthorp, Colonel
Sinclair, Sir G.
Smith, J. A.
Smith, R.
Smith, H. Vernon
Smyth, Sir O.
Somerset, Lord E.
Soinersa, Lord G.
Speirs, A.
Stanley, F.. J.
Stanley, E.
Stanley, Lord
Steuart, It.
Stewart, Sir H. S.
Stormont,tViseount
Stuart, lord .1.
Stuart, Villiers.'
Sturt, H. -C:
Surrey, Earl of
Talf..urd, 'l'. Noon
Tancred, 11. W.
Thomas, Colonel
Thompson, Ald.
Thomson, C. P.
Townley, R. G.
'l'rclawney, Sir W.
Trevor, A.
Trevor, Hon. G. R.
Troubridge, Sir T.
Tulk, C. A.
Twiss Horace
Tyrrell, Sir J.
Vere, Sir C. B.
Verner, Colonel
Vesev, Hon. Thomas
Vivian, Major C.
Vivian, John Ennis
Wall, B.
Walpole, Lord
Writer,
Wason, It.
Welhy, G. E.
Wensyrs, Capt.
Westenra, Hon. It.
Wevland, Major R.
W,gliey, I. N.
Wilbraham, R.
Williams, I'.
Williams, W. A.
'Williamson, Sir H.
Wilson, Henry
Wodehouse, Hon. L.
Wood, C.
Wood, Colonel T.
Wortley, Hon. J. S.
Wynn,
Young,
SUji.grhi'N't.Vll. 'I7C.

TELLERS.
Clerk, Sir G.
Corry, H. L.

Morpoth, 'Viscount
Marland, H.
I'ease, J.
Pectic,ll, Captain
Potter, B.
Poultcr, J.
Pryma, G.
Pend 'ryes, E.
Parry, Sir L. J.
Rundle, J.
Scholetield, J.
Stanley, E. J.

Stuart, J.
Thompson, T. P.
Thorne.ev, 'Mauna

Tooke, William
Tulk, Charles A.
Vere, Sir C. 8.1
Wakley, Thomas
W9dehouse, E.
Wood, Alderman
Wilmot, Sir E.
Wagon, Rigby
Wyse, Thomas

The Duke of Wellington Yesterday signed an order
for the admission of the carriages of his Royal Highness the
Prince of Orange within the gates of the Tower, his Highness
being expected to land at the lower stairs, from Rotterdam.
The Batavicr steamer, on her voyage to Holland, to bring over
the Prince, was obliged to run for Margate Roads, 'in conse-
quence of the violence of the gale on Monday.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The evident object of the motion of Sir 'William
.3folesworth was not so much to impugn the appoint-
ment of Lord Brudenell to the Lieutenant-Colonelcy
of the 1 lth,Dragoons, as to draw attention to the ir-
responsibility of the head of the army. That Lord
Brudenell was punished, and severely punished, was
admitted by the Hon. Baronet : that the sentence of
the Court-martial might have been unwarranted, was
also admitted ; but the circumstances connected with
the case were such as ,to justify a call for explanation ;
and for want of-a Minister responsible for the army
the explanation could not he obtained. " There
ought," said Sir William, " to be some person con-
nected with the Government in this House who should
be held responsible for the administration of the army;
but there is no one. I asked a question some time
ago with reference to an appointment in the army,
the propriety of which seemed to me questionable
—I demanded an official answer. The Secre-
tary at War told me that he was not respon-
sible, and the Leader of thp House of Commons
informed me that the Ministers of the Crown
were not responsible for the individual acts, but
only responsible for the general conduct, of the
Commander-in-chief." From this anomalous state of
the department of the army, the defence of the parti-
cular act of appointment of Lord Brudenell, when the
subject was first stated by Sir William Molesworth,
was.:,lndertaken by Sir Henry Hardinge. "My Right
Hon. and Gallant Friend the Member for Launceston,'
said Sir William, " was the only person who seemed
desirous to take the responsibility for this act of the
Commander-in-chief upon himself; but I hardly sup-
pose his Majesty's Ministers would consent that he
should be considered the official organ of the Com-
mander-in-chief in • this House, how eminently soever
my Right Hon. Friend may be qualified for that task."
The defence of Lord Brudenell was favourably received
by the House, and fault was found by several Members,
including Mr. O'Connell, with the sentence of the
Court-martial. It was contended, too, that the
Noble Lord, by the fact of his having been placed
on half-pay, was not excluded from such an appointment
as that which he has obtained. Still the question
which was put by Sir William Molesworth recurs,
" Whether it be proper to confide so important a
trust as the command of a regiment to one whose
conduct in a similar command was so solemnly de-
cided to have been most reprehensible, most dangerous
to the discipline of his corps, and most injurious to
his Majesty's service." It may be true, as Lord
George Lennox stated, that though Lord Brudenell
had never been taken out of his own regiment, and
jobbed over the heads of older officers in another, but,
that at every step he had gained he was the senior
by purchase, still Lord Brudenell only entered the
army in 1824, and obtained an unattached Licute-
nani-Colonelev in 1830, and in 1832 the com-
mand of a regiment; and some of the officers of
the gallant regiment of which he is now Lieute-
nant-Colonel, \ave been nearly as many years in
the service as "\.,e has lived years in the world,
and the two 11';',1rs have served with the regi-
ment since 1806 and 1811 ; and there is, there
fore, but too much reason to fear that, as was
observed by the Honourable Baronet, " a painful
belief cannot fail to be produced in the minds of
all connected with the British army, that pro-
vided an officer possess wealth and influence, it
matters not what his past conduct may have been
—it matters not what the solemn decision of a
Court-martial may have been against him—neither
that conduct nor that decision will be a bar to his fu-
ture promotion, nor an impediment to his advance-
ment, over the heads of veterans, to the command of
those whose conduct has ever been irreproachable."
We cannot say that we think Sir Henry Hardinge
succeeded in fully justifying the conduct of the Com-
tnander-in-chief in this case. If, as the Gallant
Officer contended, the Commander-in-chief did not
agree with the course of the Court-martial, nor concur
in the conclusion at which they had arrived, he ought
to have done more than declare, "it would appear
upon an attentive perusal of the whole proceedings
that some parts of the, evidence might bear a con-
struction less unfavourable to the prosecutor than
that which the Court have thought it their duty
to place upon them." In fact, Lord Brudenell
has just reason to complain of the Commander-
in-chief in placing him wrongfully and against
his conviction in a position from which his sub-
sequent appointment cannot fully extricate him.
But as we have said, the main question, as far
as the public is concerned, is the irresponsibility
of the heads of the different branches of the army.
Lord Howick evidently felt the embarrassment of his
position. He alleged that the Commander-in-Chief
was responsible for individual acts connected with the
management and control of the army ; and that Minis-
ters were responsible for continuing the Commander-
in-Chief in his office. But this is a very lob-sided
responsibility. There is no person in Parliament who
can supply the two Houses with information connected
with the conduct of the Commander-in-Chief; and we
have seen the inconvenience which has resulted from
this anomalous state of things. Mr. Ellice showed,
in an unanswerable manner, that the greatest inconve-
nience resulted from not placing a responsible person
at the head of the army as well as at the head of other
departments of the State. Mr. Ellice was peculiarly
qualified to speak on this subject from his official expe-
rience in the department now ' filled by Lord. Howick.
'Why should the repreSentatives of the nation be sub-
jected to the difficulties in obtaining information which
Sir William Molesworth has experienced in this case ?
Sir William has been obliged, against his will,
to put himself forward in some sort as an ac-
cuser, from inability to obtain in any other man-
ner information with respect to the conduct of the
.Commander-in-Chief. Lord Howick suggested that
those who found fault-with the present system ought
to bring it specifically under the consideration of the
House. We trust the challenge will be accepted.
Lord Hill may be all that can be desired in a Com-
mander-in-Chief, but Lord Hill is not responsible to
the country ; and no Minister seems responsible for
his Lordship. But, as was observed by Mr. Ellice,
the irresponsibility is not confined to Lord Hill. The
heads of the numerous branches of the army are all ir-
responsible. Their departments seem to be carefully
separated from the responsible part of the Govern-
ment. We have already said that there was a strong
feeling in the House in favour of Lord Brudenell;
and there was no disposition in any quarter to press
severely on him. But a most unfair advantage was
taken of this feeling. On the question being put
on Sir W. Molesworth's motion, the Hon. Baronet
expressed his disposition to withdraw it, but, on the
Speaker saying The Noes have it," Mr. Cecil
Forester said, " The Ayes have it," which forced
a division against the inclination of those gentle-
men who had brought forward the question ; and on
notice being taken that Mr. Forester had voted with
the Noes, though the division had been taken on his
saying " The Ayes have it," the Speaker expressed
his feelings in strong terms of the impropriety of such
a course, as being calculated to violate the decorum
and propriety of the proceedings of the House. We
believe in former instances of similar conduct the
Speakers have always named the gentlemen so con-
ducting themselves as tellers, or forced them to vote
on the side for which they tly e dared themselves for the
sake of forcing a division, though against their own
opinions. We notice this as it seems to be part of
the course of proceedings adopted by certain gentle-
men of this stamp, who are alone distinguished by
senseless vociferations and contemptuous violation of
the decorum of the House, and particularly as this
conduct is generally pursued by those young gentle•
men of fashion who are in the habit of sneering at the