The Sun.
London, England, 1849-02-14 00:00:00

Vbirtif Mtlttion

SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
(THIS DAY.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Twelve o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The Birkenhead Lancashire and Cheshire Junction
Railway (abandonment of part of the line, extension to
London and North-Western Railway, &c.) Bill was read
a second time, and ordered to be committed.
PETITIONS.

' Mr. ROBINSON presented a petition from the Mon-
treal Board of Trade, complaining of the colonial policy
of the country, and praying that a differential duty of
ss. might be imposed upon Idleign corn imported into
the colonies or the mother country.
Mr. BROWNE: presented a petition praying that in-
ternational disputes might be settled by arbitration.
Mr. HILDYARD presented a petition from White.
haven against the repeal of the navigation-laws.
Mr. EVANS presented a petition from a place in
Derbyshire against any further endowment of Roman
Catholics.
Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from Oswestry,
praying the House to extend the jurisdiction of county
courts to debts of 501. Also a petition from Wakefield
in favour of international arbitration ; and a petition
praying for the abolition of punishment of death.
Mr. ANSTEY presented two petitions from Limerick,
praying the House to pass alaw for the better preserva-
tion of the fisheries of the Shannon.'
Mr. J. A. SMITH presented a petition from the
Gloucester Chamber of Commerce, relating to the Sea-
man's Fund Bill.
Mr. MILES presented a petition from the parish of
Bedminster, praying that urban and rural parishes
might not be united without the consent of the parish
authorities; also two petitions from the schoolmasters
of two parishes in Gloucestershire complaining that they
had been unlawfully removed from their offices by order
of the Poor-law Commissioners.
RETURNS.

On the motion of Mr. G. THOMPSON, the following

returns were ordered :—Returns of the quantity of East
Indian cotton imported into the United Kingdom by the
East India Company, from the year 1780 to the year
1814 inclusive; of the taxed price at which the said
cotton was put up for sale and sold in London at the
quarterly sales, during each year of the above period;
similar return to the above, from the year 1814 to the
year 1834 inclusive; -showing the rate of duty
charged in the several presidencies of India upon
the export of cotton, whether coastwise or to the United
Kingdom, or to foreign countries, from the year 1780 to
the period at which such duty was discontinued ; show-
ing the rate of duty, in the several presidencies of India,
upon the transit of cotton from place to place within the
said presidencies, from the date at which such duty was
imposed until the period of its discontinuance. Of the
total quantity of cotton cloth and cotton piece goods ex-
p6rted from the several presidencies of India, whether
coastwise, to the United Kingdom, or to foreign countries,
from the time such exports were first recorded
until the present period. Copies of a circular,
dated Bombay, 28th January, 1847, addressed to
the Governor in Council of Bombay to the several mer-
cantile houses of that place, giving a detail of the Go-
vernment measures connected with introducing an im-
proved system of cultivating and cleaning cotton in the
Southern Mabratta country. Of thereport of the settle-
n.ent of Zillah numeerpoor, in the province of Bundle-
cund, made by Messrs. Allen and Muir, of the Bengal
Civil Service. Of a revenue letter from the Governor in
Council of Bombay, dated November 5, 1823, addressed
to the Court of Directors of the East India Company, and
of a prcclamation, issued by the Governor in Council of
I3ombay,and published in the Bombay Government Gazette
of the 20th June, 1838; together with copies of the noti.
fications of the 24th February and Ist of August, 1835,
and of the Ist and 17th November, 1836, issued under
the authority of Government by Thomas Williamson, Esq.
Revenue Commissioner in the Deccan, granting certain
exemptions from assessment to land cultivated with
cotton and the Mauritius sugar cane. Also of all cor-
respondence which passed on the above subjects between
the Revenue Commissioner and the Governor in Council
of Bombay, and between the Governor in. Council of
Bombay and the Governor- General of India in Council,
and the Court of Directors of,the East India Company.
INSOLVENT MEMBERS' BILL.

Mr. MOFFATT, in moving the second reading of
this Bill, remarked that it involved simply a question of
common sense and common honour. It proposed to
apply to all Members of the-House the provisions of an
Act which now only extended to part of them. It pro-
posed to withdraw from all Members, no matter whether
traders or :not: the privilege* of at all times being pro-
tected from arrest; but in introducing the Bill he had
beep :especially careful to preserve, the privileges of the
House as far as they relate to carrying on public busi-
ness. The Aot of 1812 preserved the privilege which
exempted Members from • arrest during the sitting of
Parliament, and in that respect the present Bill followed
the Act of 1812. No doubt Hon. Members were aware
that that Act provided that it. was highly necessary for
the preservationi of the dignity of Parliament, that all
bankrupt members being traders should not retain their
seats. That principle bad been found to work well in
respect of trading members, find he could see no reason
why it should not be extended alike to all
memlers, no matter whether traders or otherwise,
wiles° affairs were in an insolvent state.—(Hear.)
It had been objected, however, to this Bill that it did
not go far enough. There were some Hon. Members
who went the length of saying that the privileges of
arrest ought to be abolished altogether, but he confessed,
having carefully looked into the matter, he could nut
coincide with the propriety of that suggestion.—(hear,
hear.) And he thought he could convince the House
in a few minutes of the inexpediency of their adopting
it. In the first place, if they were to abolish the pri-
vileges which Members usefully enjoyed of exemption
front arrest during the sitting of the House, it would
give rise to endless confusion, particularly when party
feeling ran high, for then,-if they abolished the privilege,
two or three Members might be arrested just before a
division, and such a proceeding might not only be pro-
ductive of inconvenience, but might at times endanger
the constitution of the Ilinise.--(Hear, hear.) On that
ground alone, therefore, he did not think it expedient to
adopt the suggestion which one er two. Hon. Members
had thrown out. Having briefly explained the principle
of the Bill, he trusted there would be no division upon
it, and should there be any objection to the details, an
opportunity would be afforded to make any suggestions
with respect to them. Ills only object in introducing.
the Bill had been to maintain the dignity and indepen-
dence of the House, and he begge 1, therefore, to move
that it be now read a second time.
The motion having been seconded,
Sir G. GREY hoped the House would agree to the
second reading of the Bill. When the. Hon. Member
introduced a similar Bill lest session, he then thought it
necesary to caution the House not to sanction it, because
the manner In which the principle was sought to be car-
ried out was so objectionable. The Hon. Gentleman had
now reconsidered the subject, and while he sought to attain
the same object, he did it without incurring any of those
objections which were attached to the former Bill. Al-
though there were some alteratiOns which he had to pro-
pose in the details of the Bill, which, however, it was not
necessary for him to elate at present, he was
quite prepared to give his sanction . to the measure.
The Hon. Gentleman did not propose to interfere with
the House of Peers, and to the omission of that branch
of the Legislature irom the provisions of the Bill he had
no objection.
Me. BERNAL said, he felt it his duty to object to
nee Bill which had been introduced. by his Hon. Friend.
was
in net disposed to give his opposition to it
the present stage of its progress, but he warned
the House, and he begged to call the attention of the
Right Hon. Baronet (Sir George Grey) to this subject,
not to sanction such a principle as that laid down by one
of the most important clauses, and which would have the
effect of depriving the House and the country of the be-
nefit of Lion. Member's rovfices-for a period of six
months. Under the cover" justice and morality it
gave an advantage to hidadu persons, and on that
reound he was bound to state his objections to it.
Mr. GOULBURN was not prepared to offer any oppo-
sition to the second reading of the, Bill but there were
,
many points: involved in it whichhe considered required
the serious consideration of the House. The Hon.
Member who had introduced the Bill had
rather addressed himself to the objections which were
made to the Bill, than to giving any reasons for the
mode in which he had proceeded with it. As the Bill
was totally different to the one first introduced, he
thought they ought to have had some reason why the
alterations ks ad-bera made. The Honourable Gentleman
did not ir.tend tgaply the principles of it to the House
of Peers else- well eivio the House of Commons, but he
efc'no9e when a, principle of this kind was adopted, the
lorslas of the 11.4 Use uniformly applied it to all persons in
Parliament:; `!The privileges of Parliament were much
more extended' than at present; and at one time the
Members -of : both Houses of Parliament had the
privilege. --ol'etes being sued in any Court of law,
but it was thought
advisable to introduce a Bill
to alter the 'law in that respect, and the provisions of it
applied'. equally to both branches of the Legislature.
The mestie, process gave a right to- arrest Members of
Parliament until they should give security to answer an
action of debt, and that power might have been used as a
polit leaf engine to prevent the carrying of certain me asuree.
The reeske process had, hoWever, been materially di-
minished, and arrest was now hinited to cases where a
iii4gen'ent: had been obtained against a debtor. The
pi-agent-, Bill proposed to deal with a very limited
Isle s& of cases, but he thought it gave an
bpportunity to creditors of Members of Perlis-
e"lereatlne might have a strong political object in
their etnd
to resort to imprisonment with a view to obtain
character Such a course might tend to discredit the
"of a Member, and .ght prevent him, at a
moment of importar - •
try.—(llear, hea•ree. rendering a service to' his
T.h ere had been cases,
when party spirit ;)a
renderred useless asa ?high, of a party b ink
Thoseepr,et entative, and unable
to perform his_duty.
were considerations which
00:.ght not to be omitted when
the House Th
details of the Bill
were taken in to consideration
power, and without
Lill involved a question of Parliamentary eges,over
which they themselves had absolute
the interference of the other branch of the Legislature.
They would find a number of instances in the journals.
of the House, in which Members had been arrested upon
judgments pronounced against them, sometimes been
discharged, and someeim es permitted to remain in con-
1141,Sient. tie tlioughtit would be much better to deal
with thitqueat`i9g.eatlietehy a resolution of the House than
by all AitoC .%'O,-
eesseiheneene%because if they passed an Act
and Igii"tleqrfkt)rat it interfered with the proper
dis°l24*O-:40-44144.-rihich Idogaberg owed to their

77-ts,
p.i...,617

THE

constituents, they would have no power to alter it with-
out the sanction of the House of Lords; whereas, if
they dealt with it by a resolution, and found any
evil arise from it, they might make alterations
from time to time, and so abate the evil. He would not
say a word about the details of the Bill, and had merely
made those observations with the view to prevent the
House coming-into direct collision with parties with re-
spect to the arrest of Members.
Ur. JOHN WILLIAMS thought that the House was
much indebted to the Hon. Member for Devonport for
introducing the Bill. Nothing would tend more to ele-
vate the character of the House than the passing of that
Bill, and he hoped her Majesty's Government. would
extend the principle which it involved to both branches
of the Legislature.
Mr. HENLEY was anxious that the second reading
should be postponed, to enable Members to
have more time to consider whether they should
give their assent to the principle of the Bill, which there
could be no doubt was a very large one. It was quite
clear that the object of the parties who introduced it
was to carry its principle step by step to the
other branch of the Legislature. The main ground
for the introduction of the Bill was to assimilate the
case of an insolvent person to that of an insolvent trader,
but he thought that they were not at all analagous. A
trader who, from unforeseen circumstances, was un-
able to pay his debts, received his discharge
in full upon surrendering up all his property
to his creditors—but it was not so with insolvent per-
sons. The bankrupt received his certificate and was a
clear man for the future, and could be
_elected to
serve in that House, and to hold other offices.
But the insolvent man who was involved in
debt coald not get clear, 'Although his property ccald
be taken as freely as that of the bankrupt. Therefore
there was this essential difference between the two
cases, the trader being a bankrupt received his certifi-
cate, and immediately afterwards could be elected a
Member of that House, but the insolvent could not be
similarly elected unless he satisfied all his debts in full.
A Bill of that sort depended very much upon the de-
tails, and he would not take the responsibility upon
himself of opposing the second reading, but would
merely suggest its postponement until the House had
given it a more mature consideration. It.
ought never to be lost sight of, that it did
not involve the privilege of Members, but the.
privilege of constituents—(Hear, hear)—and he thought
it extremely likely that the House might occasionally
get into some kind of squabble, from parties being
elected who were not properly qualified.
The Bill was then read a second time.
On the motion that the Bill be committed,
_ _ .

Mr. GREENE suggested that the whole subject in-
serted in the Bill should be referred to a Select Com-
mittee, who should report to the House, and that the
House should then proceed to legislate upon the matter.
He put it to the Government whether this would not
be the most advisable course to adopt.
Mr. E WART hoped his Hon. Friend would postpone
the Bill for a fortnight, and that he would afterwards
proceed with it until it was passed into a law.
After a few words from Mr. MILES and Mr. GREENE,
Sir G. GREY expressed himself favourable to the
postponement of the Bill for a short time.
Mr. MOFFAT 1' assented to the postponement of the
Bill for a fortnight, but expressed his intention to oppose
the reference of the subject to a -Committee up stairs,
since every Member must have had sufficient practical
experience of the necessity or riot of the measure.
The Committee on the Bill was then deferred for a
fortnight.