The Sun.
London, England, 1841-01-28 00:00:00

Committee last Ses.lion, which was prolonged for tho
space of abatit two months ; he alluded to the Liverpool
Docks Committee. Li that case the contest became
cane almost. purely between two local parties, and it was
almost. impossible, from the views taken ,by moat re-
spectable persons on both sides, for the Members to
s-par.:te and keep clear of those local prejudices which
to the Noble Lord, the Member for Liverpool, on the
one hand, and to himself (Mr. Evart) on the other,
rendered it so difficult to come to a conclusion. But
this was only one case; such instances were almost in-
numerable. There was no Honourable Member who
had served upon Committees, who bad not reprobated
this evil in a tribunal which ought to be strictly judicial,
and should never be made the vehicle of local and per-
sonal feelings. It had even happened that on a purely
local matter, political subjects •had intervened ; one
political party had taken up one side of the question,
and another party the other side. It had been per-
ceived, for instance, that by the passing of a particu-
lar Act, the number of voters belonging to one party
would be diminished, and thus the measure, from being
a purely judicial one, had become, first, a local one,
secondly, a political one, and thus the ends of justice
were frustrated, the Houso did not do its duty,
and the public interest was damaged by such proceedings.
He had already spoken of the system of canvassing
which took place both pre% ions to and during the sit-
ting of a Committee—it was a system much to be de-
precated ; therefore he thought the time had come
when they were called upon to vindicate the character
of the House, and that Hon. Members should be al-
lowed to do their duty to the public. The public had
not slumbered on that important question. Certainly
there had not been many petitions from the people of
England, but a reference to the Journals of the House
would show that there had been numerous petitions
presented from Scotland, complaining of the subject.
He supposed, that arose from the superior foresight
and knowledge of the people of that country, which
induced them to look sharply after the doings of those
deputed to represent them. He proposed that as they
now bad a Committee of Selection at the begin-
ning of a Session, as Committees were required,
the Committee of Selection should choose seven
Members from among those gentlemen who were
least interested, either personally or locally, with
the subject-matter of the Bill to be considered.
His object was to increase the purity of these tribunals.
He had no doubt that by reducing the numbers, ho
would increase the respoesiblity and insure a more
regular attendance. Ile did not CJllle before the
House without some evidence on the subject, and he
would give them the opi&on of a gentleman well ver-
sed in the practice of Parliamentary Committees, and
who was able to form an opinion upon the subject,
namely Mr. Hayward, the well known Parliamentary
Agent. His evidence went to shove, that persons
would be prevented from fighting a bad cause before a
Committee, if the case was to be heard before an
im-
partial tribunal—that the present system was one of
very great expense, where the rich man hr.d a decided
advantage over the poor man—that it would be a de-
cided advantage to have a smaller number to form the
Committee, as it would encrease the responsibility and
secure a better attendance. The evidence of other
witnesses on these points was to the same effect, and
it was distinctly shown that local influence was too
frequently exerted in favour of a measure before a Com-
mittee of the House. On these grounds it appeared
to him that the exclusion of Members who were
locally interested either by themselves or through their
Constituents would be attended with beneficial results.
The principle was admitted to be one of reform, which
had been already in some degree carried into effect.
Committees would thus be totally changed ; there
would be thus an entire reformation effected in them.
He had not only the evidence taken before Parlia-
mentary Committees to support the suggestion which
he made, but he had also the satisfaction to End that
the plan which he proposed was adopted in the House
of Lords. It was well known to Hon. Members about
him that in the House di: Lords they found it abso-

lutely nece!sary to adopt the plan which he now sub-
mitted to the consideration of the House. He would
not further advert to that part of the question, but
refer lion. Members to the evidence of the Duke of
Richmond respecting this subject, and which he (Mr.
Evart) had then before him. He had also before him
some evidence given by Parliamentary agents during
the last Session of Parliament before Committees of
that House, establishing that the experiments made in
the other House had succeeded. He felt convinced,
that by the change which he proposed, not only would
the tribunals to which it applied be rendered more
pure, but business would be better conducted, and the
delays which had been hitherto to a very great extent
effected during the sittings of Committees by Mem-
bers interested in the questions under considera-
tion, would be put an end to. He said

Members had caused delays, and it must ir.-
evitably be so, as they were interested as
partisans, and they acted with the spirit of partisans.
Another advantage of the system he proposed was, that
many excellent Meinbcrs who at present were scarcely
ever called on to serve on Committees, would have their
talents and their energies brought into action. If Mere-
hers did not happen to represent places in some large
manufacturing districts-4 they repreSented purely ag-
ricultural districts—they were never called on to act,
except on some petty miserable Bill affecting some
change in a road, or something that never called forth
their talents. Indeed he felt confident that the plan
he proposed would materially benefit the House. At
the same time he wished it to be understood that by his
plan Members on Private Bills' Committees would cot
thus undertake two offices at the same time. If the
House wished the question might be limited to Private
Bills' Committees ; he only desired to carry a sound
principle into effect. He therefore called upon that
House to adopt the amendment he proposed. It af-
fected the character of the House—and the character
of a public body like that House, should be as that of
an individual—the first of all considerations with it.
The character of their proceedings should be as pure as
possible, or at least as little contaminated as possible.
Strongly feeling that that principle ought to be the basis
of all the regulations of that House, he called upon the

House to assent to the proposition which he laid be.
fore it.

Mr. AGLIONBY seconded the motion.

Sir GEORGE GREY hoped the Hon. Member for
Wigan would not press his motion to a division, but
would await the result of the improved system now in
operation. He hoped the Hon. Member would think
his purpose was sufficiently answered in having brought
the question before the House. If the lion. Gentle-
mat❑itlicl press ssvfootre
againstadivisi hion lmi.
e(Sir G. Grey) should be
compelled
Mr. AGLI ON BY said it had been always thought
most essential to have our tribunals as pure as possible
from all private and local interests. This question was
not a nes one, but had been raised again and again be-
fore the House. It was necessary to have local infor-
mation, but it was not necessary to have local interest
--(Hear, hear)—or if it were, the local interest he would
have should be the same as that had by the House of
Lord?. It was admitted that no Member who had
pecuniary interest could sit on a Committee about to
decide on some question that might affect it, and he
(Mr. Aglionby) could not distinguish between
pecuniary interests and the bias and force imposed upon
Members by the wishes of their constituents.—( Hear,
hear.) The system adopted by the House of Lords
was found to work very well, and he could not see why
the House of Commons should be behind that Noble
House in reforming its private business. Sufficient
time had been allowed for trial of the present system.
—(llear, hear.) The Speaker had had the honour of
introducing many reforms, but many were still required.
Mr. GOULBURN hoped that Hon. Members
would take the advice of the Hon. Baronet (Sir G.
Grey), and not press for a division. It was a question
of great importance. If he considered a Committee of
the House of Commons as a purely judicial tribunal, he
might agree with the Hon. Member for Wigan ; but he
did not regard a Committee of that House as acting in an
exclusively judicial capacity, His view of them
was that a Committee was appointed to do that which
the House of Commons itself ought to do, but which,
for the convenience of public business, was devolved to
a selection of Members of the House to prevent the
House being so encumbered with business as to be pre-
person from giving in-
vented discharging its duty to the public. He should
a Committee on a question in which he was locally in-
terested. The Hon. Member for Wigan's motion went
as
to o n think
s a Member
e m excludingber of
i the any
House of Commons from
to the point that no Member should serve on a Com-
mittee who, through his constituents, was interested in
the Bill. Now that would exclude him from doing that
which was one of the objects for which he was re-
turned.—(Hear, hear.) A Peer had no const-
tuents to represent, and could have nothing but
a local interest, therefore the House of Lords
were bound to take measures to prevent their Com-
mittees being formed by those who might be person-
ally interested. He (Mr. G.) could not consent to
adopt a practice, which, in his view of the duties of a
Member of Parliament, did ineapacitate.him from su-
perintending the interests of those by whom he was
sent to that House.—(Hear, hear.) The present sys-
tem ought to have a fair trial, but at all events it was
a subject of too much importance to be decided in so
thin a House.
Mr. WARBURTON could draw no distinction
between the duties of Members upon public Bills
and their duties upon private Bills. Members were
sent there not as the agents or attorneys of their con-
stituents, but to consider the interests of the whole
empire.—(Hear, hear.) No doubt the present prac-
tice was an improvement upon the old system, but
even now repeated applications were made from Com-
mittees on private Bills, in consequence of the requisite
number of disinterested Members not attending,
for permission to proceed in spite of that non-attend-
ance. He was of opinion that the sooner the present
system was changed the better it would be for the pub•
lie.—( Hear, hear.)
Sir GEO. STRICKLAND said that if his Hon.
Friend pressed his motion to a division, he should cer-
tainly vote with him, because he was inclined to think