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

THE ADDRESS.

Lord BRABAZON brought up the Report of the
Committee on the Address. The Address was read at
length by the Clerk at the table.
Mr. HUME wished to ask the Noble Lord near him
when the papers that were promised last night would
be laid More the House ? He found that the Con-
vention bad been already laid on the table of the
House, bat it would be recollected that the Noble
Lord. towards the conclusion of his speech last night,
had stated that the correspondence on the subject
which would be laid before them, would explain many
of the proceedings which had taken place.

Lorjl JOHN RUSSELL said. that he could not
name a day when the papers in question would be laid
before them.

Sir R. H. INGLIS was anxious to take the oppor-
tunity of calling the attention of the House to an
omission which had taken place in the Speech from
the Throne, as well as in the debate of last night.
It had been complained that any allusion to France had
been omitted in the Speech from the Throne, but
there was a question of greater interest still, the mention
of which had been omitted. He believed that every
Member present would anticipate he wished to refer dis-
tinctly to the repeal question in Ireland. He wished
that her Majesty's Ministers had advised her Majesty
to express an opinion on that subject. But even it any
consideration could have induced them to have passed
over it in the Speech from the Throne, no such con-
sideration could have justified them, as he thought, in
maintaining that studied silence on the matter which
they had maintained during the night. It was true
that it could not be expected that the Speech from
the Throne could comprehend every subject of general
interest on which Parliament might have to decide in
the course of the Session. But he would ask any Minis-
ter of the Crown, or any Member of the House, to
state any one subject of greater importance to the
tranquility and safety of the empire than that agitation
with regard to the Union which now prevailed among the
whole community in Ireland. Was the subject looked upon
as too inconsiderable, or as having no direct bearing
on the tranuillity of the empire? The Hon. and Learned
Member for Dublin, whom he did not then see in his
place, would hardly agree with Ministers in saying that
the subject on which he had almost staked his political
existence was one of minor importance. Either
the Ministry would credit the Honourable and Learned
Member or they would not. If they were inclined to
believe him let them state to the House that they did
not regard the agitation which ❑ow pervaded Ireland
as one which was confined to the individuals who were
actually engaged in it. But if they believed that Hon.
and Learned Member, and a near connexion of his
who had been engaged in the work of agitation,
50,000 men had assembled on one occasion, 100,000 on
another, and 250,000 on another, taking part in the pro-
ceedings. He would ask the Noble Lord and Hon.
Gentlemen opposite whether, if those statements were
correct, it were fit that the subject should have been
passed over unnoticed by her Majesty's Ministers in the
Speech they recommended her Majesty to address to the
House ? Or was it considered, on the other hand,
that the question did not involve the peace and tran-
quillity of the empire ? Why, her Majesty's represen-
tative in Ireland seemed to think that the mere ama-

Lion of the question involved the tranquility of the
second city of that country, and he had accordingly
despatched troops in order to enable the civil
authorities to maintain the public peace when the
matter came under discussion. There was also an-
other question which he wished to put to her Ma-
jesty's Ministers. The Hon. and Learned Member
for Dublin had distinctly stated that the Repeal question
was now a vital one, and that every man must either be
a Conservative or a Repealer. He would ask the
Noble Lord whether he would accept that alternative. Ile
would ask him whether he were content with it ? Was
he a Conservative, or was he a Repealer? The time
was come, said the Hou, and Learned Dlernber for

Orders.

Dublin, when every man must make his election. Had
the Noble Lord made his choice?—was he a Conser-
vative or a Repealer? Or, if the Noble Lord did not
accept that alternative, and did not confide in the
Honourable and Learned Member for Dublin, would
he express that want of confidence before the House
I,Vere Ministers prepared to take their stand upon this
question ? There could be no moral doubt, they were.
He was confident they would not hold the situations
they now held unless they were determined to stand or
fall by the question of the Union.—(Cries of" Hear.")
Then why not say so ? They should either have
stated so in the Queen's Speech, or in their personal
addresses to the House in the course of the debate ;
but though the Noble Lord, the Leader of the Go-
vernment, in his address, alluded to many other topics
than those contained in the Speech, he courteously
abstained—from what ?—from any allusion to what
he (Sir Robert Inglis) ventured to think the
most important subject connected with this coun-
try. Were these discussions to go on ? Were
these bodies of men to be assembled, and her Ma-
jesty's troops to be sent to keep the peace, and
Ministers to continue in apparent indifference, and
to abstain from any declaration of opinion on the
subject P A few words from them, and espe-
cially from the leader of that House, last night,
would have been very satisfactory to the people,
and he believed to every individual in that House, ex-
cept, perhaps, the Hon. AL•mber for Dublin. He
would not advert to those points in the Speech on
which sufficient discussion took place last night, far-
ther than to say that he entirely concurred in all that
had fallen from the Right Honourable Baronet (Sir
Hobart Peel), with respect to the omission of the
name of France—an omission which he thought
might have been supplied without any toes to our na-
tional dignity, and with great advantage to the feeling
and peace of the country.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he conceived his opi-
nions were sufficiently well known, as also those of his
Noble Friend the Lord Li, utenant of Ireland, on the
subject of the repeal of the Union. With respect to
the policy of advising her Majesty to make a declaration
on the subject, he conceived that the propriety of doing
so depended upon whether or not such a declaration
would be advantageous and expedient ; and certainly
in time of a formidable agitation on the subject it might
be expedient to advise the Crown to make such
a- declaration, but at other times be thought that
such a declaration would rather add importance to
the cry of a moment, and would be inexpedient.—
( Hear, hear.) His Hon. Friend had asked rattier a
singular question upon the authority of a statement of
the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, that all
men were either Coneervatives or Repealers—a state.
[Dent which the Hon. Baronet appeared to consider as
conclusive. It might be so to the Hon. Baronet, but it
was not so to him (Lord John Russell.)—(Laughter.)
The Honourable Baronet might state to in deference
to the opinions of the Hon. Member for Dublin ;
but he (Lord J. Russell) did not pay it that implicit
deference, and therefore he was not bound to make the
declaration. But he would put a question to his Hon.
Friend in return with regard to the movement of the
troops which took place in consequence of an alarm
that a breach of the peace would take place on the road
to Belfast. These troops were moved in consequence
of certain threats that were made, that if the Hon.
Member for Dublin made any such progress to Belfast,
there would be a breach of the peace, tumult, and vio•
lence. Now he begged to ask of the Hon. Baronet
whether these threats were made by Conservatives or
Repeaters ?—(Laughter.) If by Repeaters, he should
not have thought they should have made so violent an
opposition to the Honourable Member for Dublin,
but if by Conservatives, it seemed to him to
be a very odd exhibition of Conservative principles.
—(Laughter.) Perhaps his Hon. Friend would favour
him with a definition of his views on this subject.—
(Laughter.)
Toe Report was then agreed to.
Lord. JOHN RUSSELL said, perhaps it would
be convenient to inform the House, that her Majesty
would receive the Address at Buckingham Palace to-
morrow, at Half-past One o'Clock.

SESSION AL ORDERS.
On the motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL, the
House proceeded to consider and revise the Sessional

On the reading of the Order relating to the Com-
mittee on Private Petitions,

Lord STAN LEY suggested that as petitions which
were referred to Committee, and ordered to be
printed in the meanwhile, sometimes contained
allegations injurious to individuals who had no
opportunity of vindicating themselves, the House
should put the seal of its privacy on such
petitions, and forbid their publication until after the
report of the Committee. He thought they could
be printed for the use of Members only without being
permitted to go forth to the public with the sanction of
the House. He thought it was better to bring forward
this subject on the present occasion than to wait until
the first case of the sort should arrive, and then to op-
pose the printing the petition without giving any notice
of his intention. He should be glad to hear that the
Noble Lord concurred with him in opinion on this
subject.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL could only say that he
felt much disposed to agree in opinion with the Noble
Lard. Although the printing of other papers might
occasionally produce a painful effect on the feelings cf
individuals yet the:e could not be a doubt that the
greatest abuses artye from the printing petitions con-
taining charges against individuals. lle doubted
whether it would not be better, except in cases of
great urgency, where, perhaps, they would have
to consider of ,he subject matter of the petition
the next day, to abide strictly by the Standing Order,
and send all petitions to the Committee ; because, if
the matter were not to be taken into consideration for
ten days or a fortnight, the sending of them to that
Committee to determine whether they should be printed
or not could not occasion much delay, and the Commit-
tee would then see if it would be advisable that such
petitions should not be published and sold. He should
be inclined, except in cases of urgency, to abide by this
rule.

Mr. O'CONNELL believed that the rule at present
applied only to cases of urgency. He would suggest
that in addition to the general Committee of Petitions,
a particular Committee should be appointed, to which
all cases of urgency should be referred, which would
secure the inspection of a Committee in all cases of
petitions. _

Lord HO WICK was glad his Hon. Friend opposite
had called the attention of the House to this subject.
The fact was they were rapidly relapsing into the old
bad practice of allowing any Member to have his peti-
tion printed and circulated with the Votes. The Com-
mittee which sat last Session had recommended that no
petition should be printed unless it could be shown by
the Hon. Member presenting it, not only that he
intended to found a motion on such petition, but also
that the subject would not admit of delay. He regretted
exceedingly t hat it had not been the pleasure of the Howe
to follow up the recommendations of the Committee.
He thought that, at the beginning of a new Session,
the rule ought to be drawn much more strictly than it
had hitherto been, and no petition ought to be printed,•
unless it was shown that its urgency was such as not to
admit of the delay of going before the Committee.
Mr. GOULBU RN thought there were considerable
difficulties surrounding the question. He thanked his
Noble Friend for calling the attention of the House to
the subject ; but he did not think that the Noble Lord
who had just spoken had suggested an adequate re.
medy. He thought the suggestion of his Noble Friend
the Member for North Lancashire was the only one
that could be effectively applied in the case under con-
sideration.

Sir It. INGLIS concurred generally in the views
which had been expresssed by his Right Hon. Friend
near him.

Sir It. PEEL addressed the House on the same
subject. He believed that the only precaution was
vigilance, and the exercise of discretion on the
part of the House of Commons, and also on
the part of the individual Member presenting the pe-
tition. He thought there should be an assurance
from the Member that he not only intended to found
a motion upon it, but that he considered it bona file
necessary for the clear understanding of that petition,
that it should be printed for the use of the Members. The
notice of motion to print the petition ought to be made on
a different day to the presentation, that the House of
Commons might be enabled to determine whether it
should be printed or not. In the case of a petition
making personal imputations which might be unfounded,
but which it might be necessary to print for the use of the
House, the wisest course would be, in the first instance to
confine it to the Members. Ile believed upon the whole
that would most substantially fulfil every legitimate ob-
ject connected with the presentation of the petition.
It ought to rest in the discretion of the individual
Member presenting the petition. Supposing a member
professing a strict adherence to the truth should, under
the authority of the House, indulge in a strain of
vituperation, or should in a petition indulge in private
abuse of any party it would be a gross abuse of the
power of the House, and therefore he thought
the proposition of his Noble Friend ought to
be acceded to. He could easily conceive that it might
be absolutely necessary that a petition containing crimi-
natory matter should be printed, but }le quite agreed
that such printed matters should be confined to the
Members of the House,
Mr. HUME had always thought that the only pro-
per and safe plan was to trust to the discretion of indi-
ngranxious
ha
indi-
vidual Members having such petitions to present. He
would suggest that a Mn
such petition
in g
that it should be
consideration,pprlaincteedditainldsistahkaenndsinatnodbeimbe
to give notice of his intention should be obliged
to makbdeeaysuch a
motion in the Orders of the previous
making such a rule nopetition
instanter, and lie thought that day, By
would be a suffi-
c.:ent guard against an-
abt; se of the powers of
the House. The privilege of the people, so far as the
petitioning of that House went, had been too much
restricted, and he would be very Sorry to agree to any

EVENING EL IT

Mr. \VAKLEY conceived that that would place the
House in the same condition in which it stood at present.
He understood the practice to be that when an Ho-
nourable Member presented a petition and stated
that it was his intention to found a motion on it,
that no opposition would be given to the motion for
printing it. There were great evils attending such a
practice, and he was glad the Noble Lord was about
to put a stop to it. He himself knew many cases in
which the petitioners were only anxious to have
the petition printed in order that the state-
ments might go before the public. That appeared
to him a gross imposition on the House—(Hear, hear)
—and he thought that any Hon. Member presenting a
petition to the House containing charges against an iss-
dividual should take the greatest pains to ascertain tho
correctness of the allegations. if the petition were
presented merely for the use of the ,'Members it would
he unfair to shut out the accused party from a know-
ledge of its contents. In his opinion the Noble Lord
ought to postpone the resolution for further coneideration.
• After a few words of explanation from Lord STAY.
LEY, the resolution was agreed to:
BUSINESS OF THE 'HOUSE.
Mr. BROTHERTON rose and said the motion lot
had the honour to submit to the House was, that no.
new business should be brought on which was exce;)ted
to by five Members after twelve o'clock at night. The
proposition appeared to him so reasonable, that he was
much inclined to hope he should receive greater
support on the present occasion, than on any former
one. He was quite convinced there was a proper feel-
ing in the country that did not approve of the late sit-
tings of the House. They often boasted of the wisdom.
of our ancestors, and our ancestors wisely legislated
by daylight. This was also the practice of all the Le-
gislative Assemblies in Europe and the United States.
and he conceived it would be attended with teeny bene-
ficial consequences if it were adopted in that House.
He need not enlarge upon the injurious effects of the
present system. lie was satisfied that the pre-
sent system was injurious to the health of Mem-
bers, and that it did not facilitate in any degree
the public business. Neither was it for the advantage
of the public that Members suffered in their health,
and in some instances their deaths might be attributed
to the late sittings of that House. He therefore hoped
that Hon. Members would support the motion for their
own sakes, If it were carried, it would not retard,
but facilitate, the public business. Some Hon. Mem-
bers objected to his motion, on the ground that it
would have the efrect of lengthening the Session.
He did not believe that would be the case,
although it might shorten some of the speeches which
could be very well dispensed with.—(A laugh.) The
public had a right to be made acquainted with the
proceedings of that House, but they all knew that
when the business was carried on long after mid-
night, the Members were fatigued, the galleries unoccu-
pied, the reporters exhausted,and the public consequently
not properly made acquainted with the proceedings of
that House.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) It was
rather an invidious task for one Hon. Member con-
stantly to attempt to adjourn the House at a certain
hour, and he would rather that the House should adopt
some rule on the subject. He had never any
desire to set himself against the wishes of a majority
of the House, although his opinion was it would
be better it the House adjourned earlier. His propo-
sition was so reasonable that he hoped it would meet
with general support. The Hon. Member concluded
by moving—" That no new business, which shall be
objected to by Five Members, be brought on after
twelve o'clock at night."
Mr. MART seconded the motion, and observed,
that time had convinced him some alteration ought
to be made in the hours of that House, and he was con
vinced that the opinion of the public upon this subject
would very coon prevail over the opinion of that House.
The Rolls' Court formerly sat during the evening, but
since it had met in the daytime all who fre-
quented that Court agreed that much more busi-
ness was done, and that what was done was
done a great deal better.—(Hear, hear.) He thought
it most unreasonable that the time of those Mem-
bers who were willing to devote the daytime to public
duty in the llouse of Commons should be sacri-
ficed to the convenience of those who be!onged to trades
sand pro'essions. He thought, too, that if the hours of
that House were reformed, that would have a good effect
on the country, for he believed, that the late hours which
prevailed in this country more than in any other in the
world, were chiefly owing to the example of Parlia-
ment. This custom interfered with the proper despatch
of public business in every department. At none of
the public offices was there any attendance until
twelve or one o'clock in the logy. If any fo-
reigner, who had only learned that this country was
the first to set the example to the world of representa-
tive legislation, were to come into that House, in. I I
course of a debate after midnight, what notion would he
form of the excellence of their system? He witld
see the Secretary for the Treasury stretched upon ono
bench, and the Secretary for the Admiralty slumberinon g
another.—(Laughter.) lie would sec the Peysident
of the Board of Control subdued in sleep;s•und the
Noble Secretary fur Foreign Affairs, deaf to the mice
of war, rc.cchoed from the Opposition benches.—(A
laugh.) He (Mr. E.) supported the resolution of his
Hon. Friend, because although it was but a small step
it was still a step in advance.
Mr. BRISCOE supported the motion. The only
result of the present system was to detain Members
hour after hour, wasting their constitutions, in idle de-
clamation and contentions. The Parliament of this
country acted differently in the days of Lord Claren-
don, and he thought they then acted on the common-
sense view of the subject. He therefore hoped that
the House would accede to the motion of the Hon.
Member for Salford.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that they had several
times discussed that question, and he believed the
Honse had never been able to perceive that a strict
rule of the kind proposed would enable them to do more
business, or to do it more conveniently. On the contrary
his opinion was that no other result could follow from
such a rule, than to prevent them from going through the
public business, and to compel them to prolong their
labours. The Hon. Member for Wigan should re-
member that there were many merchants, lawyers,
and other official men, Members of the House, who
were employed during the day, and who could
not give them their attendance. There were
also many Members employed in the morn-
ing on Committees ; and he (Lord J. Russell) was sure
the time of those Members was very fully oc-
cupied by their labours. If, therefore, they were to
exclude from their debates lawyers, mercantile, and
official men, they might only prolong their debates
without increasing their knowledge on any subject. He
would refer to the cases of France and America, but ho
believed that whatever might be the merits of the elo-
quence both of the French Chambers and the Ameri-
can Congress, for various reasons into which he would
not enter, there was no comparison between the busi-
ness done by that House and the quantity of business
done by the American Congress, which after all was
not the legislature of the country ; or by the French
Chamber, in which very few laws were passed in
the course of the year. He had never been convinced
by the arguments in favour of the motion, and he must
again refuse to support it.

Mr. O'CON NELL thought there was a great dif-
ference between going through business and doing it ;
that more business might be gone through by that
House than by the Chamber of Deputies of Franco,
or the Congress of America, he could readily believe ;
but he much doubted whether they did as much.—
(Hear, hear.) Acts of Parliament bad been passed
aws-itrleiitinectitiienglatsittsfellveaysetarcsrewhch no mand,itionthechcaorauelttlecroondr
of the
House. The merchants of London were the only
merchants who were accommodated by the present
method of conducting the business of the House.
Mercantile men from other places had to leave their
business entirely in order to come to attend their Par-
liamentary duties. With regard to the lawyers, it was
only the lawyers of London who were converlienced ;
the lawyers of Scotland
w a
regardand t Irelandsou ita
Committees
ie n
hadcotnovl;eeah;weee their
of
those
profession altogether. The House ought not to be
would
eomt be, if compelled
t °give yto
individualswith
they
Lay, aLY
Lay, nine o'clock in the morning, and sat till eightay in
the evening, for two or three dais in the week, to de-
vote two days exclusively to the business of Committees ;
and a Committee sitting for an entire day would, most
likely, get through their business without any adjourn-
ment being necessary, and Hon. Members were aware
of the numberless expenseshe before
upon parties hav-
inghese numerous adjournmentsoreHtheossiewuV
busin,fss to transact
mvomteittfees
ortlbiey
motion, although he did not think it went far enough.
It was a glaring absurdity to conduct all their delibera-
tions after night. Parliament was a high Court of
Justice—no other Court conducted its business by
night. The motion required the concurrence of five
Gentlemen to force the House to an adjournment.
Now, the Hon. Gentleman well knew that five Mem-
bers could compel the House to adjourn it at any time,
so that it was only removing the invidiousness of the
task from those Gentlemen. The Hon. and Learned
Gentleman concluded by expressing his determination
to support the motion, as bringing back the House to
the dictates of common sense.
Mr. BROTH ERTO N, in reply, stated that the late
Speaker said that he had suffered more in his health
from six weeks' late sitting than ho had during all the
preceding Session, when the House adjourned at 12.
wae ftaoesr
beaewtilnietegr
eda idvjtiohsuinaortnt,ehdwi
sobuel d suggest the
mightnd beone
dayp_ro(l‘pcirrii.lecticyi-rUos.f;nloEid'ieebb
consi-
dered interfering with the freedom of discussion, but
he appealed to Hou. Members whether after two days'
debate any new matter had been elicited by further ad-
, Jourarneato, The result of his proposition would be

r..... 4 '-'!.
2, \--‘ s,, &•frt-.7;
~ ~ft,_!.
---11
.i- 1-.7 ..1-* • - - \-......"
9. 74. V
resolution the tendency of which would be to increas*
that restriction.
Mr. F. FRENCH said it ought to be understood
that no petition should be printed unless the Member
gave notice that it was his intention to found a motion
on it.