The Sun.
London, England, 1836-08-12 00:00:00

-• • -••••-.... :;

own, which the managers baVCd acliver—(Cheers)—and
if these two ffMN. Lulus disapprove of the conduct of my
elqi6 friends in not entering into a debate, they at the
same time come down to this House and declare, that
they disapprove of these reasons altogether; 110 thiFi my
Lords, is not the 00,y ro•!elitilit'4llle Cli.ctimstance in the con-
duct of 'CVO Noble Lords.—(Hear, hear, hear.) It
Wears that not only do they disagree from the reason-
ing of my Noble Friends—not only do they condemn
the managers of the free conference—bet they also con-
demn the cenclact of the House itself, and the conduct of
the Hoase upon these two questions now under our consi-
deration.—(Hear, hear) My Lords, I was sitting for
nearly three months o.t different times in a Committee up
stairs, with the Noble Baron and the Noble Viscount, upon
this very question ; and the Noble Viscount has stated to
your Lordships that the Pill wet poised ahattiniously in
the House of C011Wit1.1; but I am sure that I may say,
with much more foundation in fact, though) of course, my
Lords, I do not mean to doubt the sincerity of the asser-
tion of the Noble 17seount---4tit I think I may say,
with some feetiLtlim in fact, that these two questions
did Pass unanimously in the Committee above stairs, and
also through this House. In the Committee up stairs I,
my Lords, was the person who moved the clause respect-
ing the appointment of the Charitable Trustees, and likewise
the clause giving the casting vote to a person selected by
lot ; and rmay state that there was not a single word on
that Committee stated against those clauses. My Lords, I
don't mean to say that I entertained no objections whatever
to any of the provisions of that Bill. I certainly did—(Hear,
hear)—but I would not state the considerable objections
of several of my Noble Friends, nor the amendments which
they wished to introduce ; because, my Lords, I consi-
dered that I came to a compromise in agreeing to the
Select Committee ; and I felt myself bound to go on and
proceed with that compromise.—(Hear.) Well, then, I call
upon your Lordships—l call upon tie Noble Viscount—
I call upon the Noble Baron now to support that to which
they agreed upon that occasion, after three months' deli-
berate consideration—that which they thought best for the
public interests and convenience. Now, my Lords, the
Noble Viscount since then thinks that we have treated the
House of Commons with insult and contumely—( Hear,
hear)—because we are now going to insist upon our amend-
ments. My Lords, a Bill (with respect to the administra-
tion of charitable trusts) was sent to this House from the
House of Commons in August, and I believe I was the
person who moved that the second reading of that measure
be deferred for three months ; and the ground upon which
I recommended to your Lordships to pursue that course
was, that the measure tended to place charitable trusts at
the disposal and government of a party in the Corporations;
there was certainly an appearance of an election, for the
purpose of throwing it out of the hands of a party ; but, as
the mayor was the person who was to conduct the affair, it
was quite evident that it would have been left in the hands
of a party.—(Hear, hear.) On that principle, my Lords,
I objected to the arrangement proposed ; and, as to the
charge with regard to the House of Commons, I stated
my opinions, my Lords, freely and openly, as I have a
right to do upon every question—(Cheers)—but certainly
it was the furthest thing from my intention to say, and I
believe I did not say, anythinr, disrespectful towards the
House of Commons, or towards any individual Member of
this House. The Noble Viscount says that if we persist
in this amendment the Bill to a certainty will be lost.
What if it is ? Is that our fault ? Don't we take the
only step possible in securing the Administration till next
year?—(Hear, hear.) 'Why, my Lords, if we withdraw
this amendment, then it is quite obvious that these cha-
rities cannot be administered until Parliament shall meet
again after the lapse of some months, and until after the
meeting of Parliament some provision shall be made in the
course of the next Session.—(Hear, hear.) In respect,
my Lords, to the other part of this Bill—the appoint-
ment by lot of a person to give the casting vote,
I feel the greatest satisfaction in supporting the mo-
tion of my Noble and Learned Friend.—(Loud cheers.)
Lord ELLEN BOROUGH said,. what was the course
they had pursued ? Nothing, he thought, could be more
respectful. They had heard the reasons of the Commons ;
they had thought it advisable that those reasons should be
considered in exicnso—(Hear)—to enable them to delibe-
rate fairly upon them ; and then, if they remained attached
to their own amendments subsequently to that careful con-
sideration, they could appoint managers, and demand a fur-
ther free Conference with the Commons.—(Cheers.) That
was the notion of the managers on the part of their Lord-
ships, and if that House should now decide to persist in
their amendments the next step, of course, would be a
motion for a further free Conference, at which it would be
their duty to explain, on behalf of that House, the reasons
for persevering in such amendments.—( Hear.)
Lord LYNDHURsT said, when the Bill had been sent
to a Committee up stairs, he had been instrumental in re-
commending the names of some of those Noble Lords to
be placed upon that Committee, and every one of his Ma-
jesty's Ministers in that House was a member of the Com-
mittee. With respect to every question that came before
it, there was not the slightest difference of opinion between
any of the Members of that Committee. The only sub-
ject that occasioned anything like conversation—he would
not call it discussion—was the additional powers necessary
to be given to the existing charitable trustees. Those mat-
ter 'occupied three or four days, but were at last settled to
to the satisfaction of every one. Then what was the ground
for the attack of the Noble Viscount, when all the argu-
ments ho had urged had been urged in furtherance of
an Act to which the Noble Viscount was himself a party ?
—(Cheers.) Then the Noble Viscount had told them some-
thing about a Bill respecting charitable trusts, intro-
duced by my Noble and Learned Friend (Lord Brougham)
last session. He admitted that such a Bill was introduced ;
it was read a first and second time, but it was never made
a subject of discussion in their Lordships' House ; and it
was agreed on all hands that it would be advisable to let
it stand over until the present session ; and the Noble
Viscount now seemed to think that they were to blame for
not having revived that Bill. The Noble Viscount had

himself proposed the withdrawal of it—(" Lord Brougham
himself," from Lord Melbourne)—at least he (Lord Lynd-
hurst) had not made the proposal, and was he now to be
blamed for not havirg introduced that measure this session?
Was it not the duty of the Government to have done it,
rather than that of an individual Member of Parliament—
(Cheers)—to take up an Act which had been proposed
last session ? He trusted he had been able to satisfy the
House that no blame ought fairly to be attributed to him.—
( Hear.) Then, with respect to the Bill now before the
House, those amendments had been adopted long before
any Bill upon the subject of charity trusts had come to that
House. They had been adopted prospectively for the pur-
pose of having full opportunity for the consideration of every
measure connected with the subject—(Cheers)—they had
been adopted as a matter of precaution, in the event of no
Bill passing the other House, or of a Bill, having passed
the other, and not passing that House.—( Hear.) After
a time a Bill on the subject came up to that House ; but
under the circumstances, did it necessarily follow that they
should agree to it?—(Cheers.) In the debate upon that
Bill it was now said that he had used terms derogatory to
the character of the other House. If he had done so, it
would have been the duty of the Noble Viscount then at
the time to have called the attention of the House to the
subject—( Hear, hear, hear)—but he could not conceive
that he had employed any such expressions. In conclusion
he must again beg of the Noble Viscount, if he would con-
descend to reply to his observations, to state what were the
expressions which he considered disrespectful to the other
House.—(Cheers.)
Lord MELBOURNE said that the Noble and Learned
Baron had mistaken his observations. He had stood up
solely on the part of his Noble and Learned Friend (Lord
Brougham) to protest against the supposition that his
absence could be considered as any reason for not intro-
ducing any measure this session upon the subject in
question, because the house was perfectly acquainted
with his views and opinions in reference to it. But,
so far from laying any fault to the Noble Lord oppo-
site, he (Lord Melbourne) distinctly stated that it might
be the fault of Government—it might be the fault
of any one else ; but he had risen merely to vindicate
the Noble and Learned Lord from being in any way the
cause of the delay, which had occurred either from negli-
gence or from illness. Upon the two amendments, if he
recollected correctly, it was distinctly intimated in the
reasons given on the part of the Commons that they
considered the one regarding the election by lot far less
important than the other, and that if they were inclined to
give way upon the one, there would be little difficulty in
arranging the other.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Duke had
said that ho agreed to the introduction of these clauses,
and undoubtedly he (Lord Melbourne) had done so.—
( Hear, hear, hear)—hut he must beg the Noble Duke to
understand that he had also stated that that must not
be a bar to future legislation upon the subject.--••
(Cheers from both sides.) He did not mean to bring
any charge against Noble Lords opposite ; but he must at
the same time say that, supposing those Noble Lords to have
any political interest in keeping the funds in their present
hands, they had adopted the exact way to accomplish their
purpose by stating that these amendments should not be a bar
to future leg;slation ; but, at the same time, determining to
throw out every measure which might be presented to them
on the subject. ( Ministerial cheers.) Thus, then, they might
say, we shall obtain a settlement of the funds in the present
hands for some time at least.—( Hear, hear.) That might
be fair political and Parliamentary joekeysbip ; but jockey-
ship in his opinion it was.—(LTrd cheers.) It had been
then and was still the impression upon his mind that,
during the course of those debates, great jealousy and sus-
picion had been expressed towards the House of Commons ;
that it had been distinctly stated by some Noble Lords that
they viewed every measure coming from that House with
suspicion, because they considered them as intended to sup-
port.uvolutionary intentions.—(No, no.) He was stating

his recollection ; but he hoped he was wrong. He was
very glad to find that the Noble Lords opposite disavowed
such views, such sentiments, such opinions. It was, how-
ever, his impression still that such was the character, the
etlcl tore elf that debater a feelints on the part of
Noble Lords that they could always see a Creeping on—
always some encroachment. There was an instance in
the clause regarding the school of Louth, which was
opposed by a Noble Baron (Wharneliffe) opposite, who
had. exolairned—" Here we see the temper of the
Bill—liete iye see the feel object." (Some observations
here fell from Lord Wharncliffe.) Oh, he knew the Noble
Lord too well to doubt his ardour.—(Cheers and laughter.)
Such views, however, had been distinctly disavowed by the
Noble Duke, and he confessed that he had never heard
anything of that character or nature fall from the Noble
Duke.—(Cheers.) He could not say the same for others.
—(Ministerial cheers.) Such was the impression upon his
mind of the character of the debate. If he was called
upon be could not say what were the precise words upon
which his motion was founded. He understood now that
there was nothing particular in the precise words.—( Hear.)
But everything consists in the spirit, in the tone, in the
animus which dictated the observations ; the precise words
arc nothing after all. But certain he was that in that de-
bate there had been a great degree of jealousy and suspi-
cion of the House of Commons, and of everything that was
popular, and belonged to the popular party throughout the
country.—(Loud Ministerial cheering.) With respect to
the question at present before the House, whatever might
be the inconvenience arising from the total loss of the Bill,
he firmly believed that the House of Commons would not
leave the charitable trusts in the hands of those who at
present held them for six months—no, nor fox six weeks--
nor for six minutes, and concluded the Noble Lord, I think
they are right.—(Cheers.)
Lord ABINGER said, when the Noble Viscount used
language so freely in reproving the resolutions of that
House, it would be quite as well for him to consider whe-
ther it was becoming in him, as the leader of that House
—(Cheers)—as the first Minister of the Crown—(Re-
newed cheers)—to exhibit a tone and manner of behaviour
such as that which he had just displayed.—( Loud cheers.)
Did the Noble Viscount suppose, because they entertained
different political opinions from himself, that they did not
feel sensibly the rude manner and the rude language with
which lie addressed them ? He begged most distinctly to
negative what had been urged by the Noble Viscount as
the feeling of that House ; he absolutely protested against
the truth of that supposition.—(Loud cheers.) He
should rather have been inclined to imagine that the Noble
Viscount was using some laconical argument to bring that
House into popular contempt.—(Hear, hear.) 'Whether
that was so or not, the Noble Lord himself must know
best.—(Cheers.)
Lord WHARNCLIFFE should certainly oppose the
clause. The introduction of it was an attempt on the part
of the House of Commons to place their Lordships in an
unpleasant position before the public. But he was sure the
attempt would not succeed.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said the course which
lie felt bound to adopt placed him in an unpleasant position.
The Noble Lord and the Noble Duke opposite said he
should not have supported the clause ; the reason he did so
was, that he did not believe, when the Bill was brought up,
their Lordships would have refused to sanction it. He did
not at all imagine it would interfere with the general suc-
cess of the Bill.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE said the clause was put in, in
the hope that it would produce a settlement of the question,
and now the clause was held over them by the Opposition
for the purpose of browbeating and coercing them.
Lord LYNDHURST said that even if amendments
were now in existence, lie would not have assented to the
Bill as it came from the other House.—(Cries of" Divide.")
The LORD CHANCELLOR said the question was
whether the House would adhere to their Lordships' amend-
ment or not.
Lord LYNDHURST begged to remind the Noble
Lord that the Noble Viscount (Melbourne) proposed, as an
amendment, to introduce the word " not."
The House then divided on this amendment, when there
appeared—
Contents
Non-contents

Majority against Ministers —ll
STEAM CARRIAGES.

The Report of the Steam Carriages Bill having been
brought up,
Lord LYNDHURST hoped that the question would
be postponed, and considered next Session, and a more
satisfactory Report drawn up. .
The Marquis of SALISBURY would move then that
the Report be received that day three months.
Lord HOLLAND would beg to ask the Noble Lord
opposite (Ellenborough) whether, in moving for a new Con-
ference, he intended to propose any new reasons, or what
new mode of proceeding he meant to adopt ?
Lord ELLENBOROUGH said the Noble Lord had
no right to ask him that question, as he was only an indivi-
dual member of the Conference.
Lord HOLLAND thought he had a right to ask the
question, as the Noble Lord was presumed to speak the
opinions of the.managers and his own.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH acted only as an indivi-
dual Member of that House ; and as manager of the Con-
ference, he should be guided by the rules of.that House.
CONFERENCE.
A message from the Commons announced that the Com-
mons were ready to meet their Lordships in free conference.
The following Peers were then nominated to meet the
Commons :—The Bishop of Gloucester, and Lords Ripon,
Ellenborough, Fitzgerald, Wharncliffe, Lyndhurst, and
Abinger.
After a protracted absence, the managers of the Confe-
rence having returned,
The Earl of RIPON rose to report to their Lordships
from the Noble Lords appointed on the part of their Lord-
ships' House to manage the Conference which had just taken
place, and which on the part of the House of Commons had
been conducted by Lord John Russell and others. The
managers on the part of their Lordships had informed the
managers on the part of the Commons that they considered
it their duty not to consent to give up the amendment in
line 35, inasmuch as the Municipal Corporation Act,
not having provided that a fresh election should take
place in the case of an equality of votes, their Lordships
considered it in accordance with the principle of that to
meet the difficulty arising from an equality of votes by pro-
viding that, in such case, the election should be decided
by the casting vote of the person presiding. The managers
on the part of their Lordships had likewise felt bound to
adhere to the insertion of clause marked L., and they
urged upon the managers on the part of the House of Com-
mons the consideration of the inconvenience that would
arise from placing these charitable trusts under the control
and management of the Lord Chancellor, and they also re-
presented that it would be less inconvenient, and much.
more desirable that the administration and management of
those charitable trusts should be allowed to continue with
those in whose hands they had been placed last year, with
the concurrence of both Houses of Parliament, until next
session, or such other time as Parliament would agree to a
general measure on the subject. Their Lordships had also
stated to the managers for the House of Commons that no
practical injury had, to their knowledge, resulted from those
trusts remaining in the hands in which they were placed
in the last session of Parliament. Their Lordships
had expressed their desire that the management and
administration of those funds should be placed on
a permanent and satisfactory footing, and had expressed
their opinion that it was exceedingly desirable that the ad-
ministration of charitable trusts for the benefit and relief of
the poor should, as far as possible, be divested of all party
feelings, and separated from the operation of all party inte-
rests whatsover. The managers on the part of the Com-
mons had stated, in reply to these representations, that.
they were instructed not to yield these two clauses. With
respect to the first amendment, though they considered
that giving the casting vote to the person presiding would
lead to inconvenience, and was inconsistent with the spirit
of the Act, yet they were willing to refer that part to the
further consideration of the House of Commons. With
respect to clause L, by which the present. charitable trus•
tees were continued in the administration of these trusts,
they stated that they could by no means consent to leave
these trusts in their present management. They re-
presented that the conduct of these trustees had given
dissatisfaction to their constituents, and that they could
not consent to their being continued on any account. 'l'o this
the managers on the part of their Lordships replied that the
provision made last year showed that Parliament was aware
that inconvenience would arise from the management of those
trusts devolving on the Lord Chancellor, and that much
more inconvenience would arise from that arrangement than
could result from continuing them in their management.
The managers of the Commons urged, in answer to this,
that if upon these grounds they now consented to continue
the present trustees, they might on a future occasion be
expected to consent to a further continuame of these
charitable trusts in those hands which administered them
at present. The managers on the part of the House of
Commons stated that they considered the Bill to be a
valuable Bill, but that, as they could not concur in the al-
terations which had been referred to, the Bill, however other-
wise beneficial, would be lost. The managers on the part
of their Lordships replied, that their Lordships were always
desirous to maintain a good understanding with the House
of Commons, and that they would be willing to defer to
their opinion on either of the points in dispute, if their
Lordships felt that they could do so consistently with what
they felt to be conducive to the public interest. They
again represented at length to the managers on the part of
the House of Commons the manifest inconvenience that
would result from placing these charitable trusts in the ad-
ministration of the Lord Chancellor, that there had not
come within the knowledge of Parliament, nor were they