The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-03 00:00:00

On our re-admission into the gallery we found
Lord J. MANNERS arldrwing the House--He said that he never
knew so illsgraceful au occurrence its that of a reformed House of
Commons fearing to appeal to its constitzency. He could net under-
stand how that House, which was but an aggregation of private in-
dividuals, could maintain its honour, while the honour of the in-
dividual Members was disregarded. Was it possible tiiet, having de-
stroyed the honour of 129 Members of that House, they could maintain
by a constitutional fallacy, the honour of that House? After sach an
argument, he thought the House could not refuse to postpone for any
number of nights that which Hon. Members might suggest. and so
long as the Hon. Member for' Eversham, or any Hon. Member should
think lit to divide the House he would support them.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL would be very sorry to incur the displeasure
of the Noble Lord, and that he should inflict upon the House frequent
divisions in consequence of the remarks which had fallen from
him.

Sir C. BROOKE complained that a division npou the amendment
should be desired so soon. He considered after the House had
been occupied by the Members for Manchester, Durham, Wolver-
hampton, the city of London, and the Right honourable Baronet,
that it was unfair to call for a division until his sia.e of the House
were heard, and he now moved that the House do adjotZrn, and the
question ha resumed to-morrow night.
Sir R. PEEL said that the best course to pursue, would be W dis-
pose first of the motion of the Hon. Gentleman, as that wet the re-
gular mode of dealing with the question.—(Cries of " No, no.")
Mr. FERRAND said he wished to justify the conduct the protee-
tionists were pursuing by reading a portion of a speech delivered by
the Right Hon. Baronet when in opposition in proposing a vote or
want of confidence in the Noble Lord opposite (Russell). Here the
Hon. Gentleman read a portion of the Right Hon. Gentleman's
speech, and concluded by moving that the debate be adjourned,
when _ _ _

Mr. MORGAN J. O'CONNELL said that he must oppose the
proceeding adopted by the Hon. Member; it was too bad to quote
from former speeches—what had a quotation from a speech ex-
pressing a want of confidence in the Government to do with the
question, that Mr. Greene do leave the chair? When gentlemen
came there and did nothing but quote what Hon. Members had said
and done in other places, the country would draw its
own conclusions with reference to such conduct. What
reference had one word of the quotation to the
motion of the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton. He had come to
that House to vote on the question. lion. Gentlemen who wished
to express their opinions, and who could not do so during the debate
(the longest on the records of that House), could speak on other
amendments. They could speak on the report that they must make,
or on the second or third reading of the Bill. The course taken by
the Hon. Member for Knaresborongh has shown that their object
was not discussion, for had any of the expressions he had used borne
upon the question? Were the statements of the Noble Lord made
some twenty or thirty years back to be a reason why the debate
should be adjourned ? The people could see that they were a com-
pact minority, and if they persevered in their present course, they
would lower themselves and the House in the eyes of the country.
Mr. G. BANKES complained that Members on that side of the House
had not been fairly treated. Especially he would refer to the Hen.
Member for Essex (Mr. Palmer), a gentleman occupying the mest
respectable station and character in that House, who had been treated
in such a manner that he (Mr. Bankes) could hardly hear an obser-
vation he made. He had intended to reply to some remarks that
had fallen from the Right Hon. Baronet, but he had given way to the
gl:fredmtboetrhheamd
erase cueirveesdpwroopuolsde
proposed
obtyptrheev
Government.
prevent r
Hon. Member for Essex ; but he would say that thelreatment
that.enmmbeenrts. on that
Hon. Member
side of the House from taking the course which they thought neces-
sary Lord CLAUDE HAMILTON remarked that as the Hon. Mem-
ber (Mr. Ferrand) had read from the speech of the Right Hon.
Baronet, there would be no use in his adjouring the debate
Mr. FERRAND said that was not all that he had to give.' He had
fifty more extracts that would show up the Right Hon. Baronet to
the derision and scorn of the country.

•
Lord JOHN RUSSELL did not see any advantage in disputing
about the fact whether the question should be settled three years
hence or now. He would suggest that the Right Hon. Baronet
should take the simple negative on the amendment now, when the
Chairman could report progress, and ask leave to sit again, when the
discussion could be resumed.
Captain POLHILL said that every Hon. Member in that Heim
had a right to speak his opinions on the question, and however in-
convenient an adjournment might be deemed they were quite
justified in asking for it.
The debate was then adjourned.
The Home adjourned at Half-past One o'clock.