The Sun.
London, England, 1841-10-01 00:00:00

next Session, move for leave to bring in a Bill to repeal
certain clauses in an Act passed in the 9th year
of the reign of George IV., entitled "An Act to
Consolidate and Amend the Laws relating to Savings'
Banks," so far as the same authorises the Com-
missioners of the National Debt to apply any money
standing in the names of the savings' banks depositors
into Exchequer Bills, and to convert those Exchequer
Bills into three per cent. Consolidated Bank Annuities ;
and which law gave an unlimited power for the sale and
purchase of such annuities, whereby a loss had been
already, and might be hereafter, sustained, by the savings'
banks depositors, and an addition made to the debt of the
nation without tie authority, or control of Parliament.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER sug-
gested that the Hon. Member had no right to put an ar-
gument, as he had done, into his notice. Besides, it was
not true that the savings' bank depositors had sustained a
loss by the system complained of ; and, therefore, he put
it to the Hon. Member, whether he would allow a false
impression to go abroad, in consequence of his giving
such a notice? _ _

The SPEAKER said it was certainly not in accord-
ance with the rules of the House for an Hon.,Member to
append an argument to a notice of motion.
Mr. WILLIAMS—If the savings' banks depositors
cannot suffer —(Loud cries of " Order, order.")
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER.—AII
that is matter of argument, as the Hon. Gentleman must
see_

Mr. WILLIAMS.—It is matter of fact.—(Order.)
NEW WRIT.

On the motion of Sir J. GRAHAM, a new writ was
ordered for a Burgess to .serve in Parliament for the
Borough of Wilton, in the room of Viscount Fitzharris
now Earl of Malmesbury.
CASE OF THE LATE MR. J. BROUGHAM.

Sir J. GRAHAM then rose and.spoke as follows :
Sir, I hope, although I may not be strictly in order, that
the House will extend its indulgence to me while I offer
some explanation relating to certain expressions which
are reported to have fallen from me in the course of
debate the other evening, and which, I have been
informed, have greatly pained the feeling's
of a Noble Lord, both as touching himself
and as reflecting on the memory of his dey.t-ted bro-
ther, which, therefore, he feels most serzinly, and as
the friend of that Gentleman, I alto join in those
feelings.—(Hear.) Nothing -can in general be more
accurate than the reports of v:ltat pass in this House,
and I am therefore dispose.i to believe that what fell from
me was incorrect rather than that I have been mis-
represented. The House will recollect the other even-
ing the Honoure.bie Member for Sheffield, referring to the
compensation awarded to Mr. Scarlett in consequence of
the abolition of his office in the Court of Exchequer, re-
sisted the grant of that compensation, and asked if it
was not exactly a parallel case to that of Mr. James
Brougham, who had received an appointment from
his brother, the Lord Chancellor, which it had, been
intended to abolish, and who had not received any
compensation. The Honourable Member for Shef-
field contended that the cases were strictly anala-
gous. I rose afterwards, and contended that there
was a striking difference in the two cases. I
statcd that in the case of Mr. Brougham, when Lerd
Brougham, the then Lord Chancellor, authorised the
appointment, his Lordship, at the very time the ap-
pointment was made, contemplated the abolition of the
office which Mr. Brougham filled, so that there was a
great difference between the two cases. I then intended
I to have said, " The question arises, was he entitled to
compensation ?" Instead of which, lam reported
to have said, " The question arose, was he entitled to
compensation ?" which seems to convey the meaning that
the question of compensation had been raised at the
time. Now nothim: can be further from the fact. The
question never was raised, and nothing can be more
honourable than was the conduct of the Lord Chan-
cellor and of Mr. Brougham on that occasion.—(Cheers.)
The question was never raised at all.—(Cheers.) I am
exceedingly sorry that any thing should have fallen from
on that occasion which should seem to convey the
glithtest feeling of disrespect to the memory.of my de-
parted friend—(hear. hear, hear)—and I regret exceed-
ingly- that any thing should have fallen from me to
wound the feelings of the Noble Lord.—(Loud cheers.)