The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-23 00:00:00

zealously endeavouring to avail himself of the favourable cir-
cumstances which his predecessors hod not. In 1835 the great
paint he had to consider was, whether he should carry into effect
the provisions and powers of the measure under which his two
predecessors had acted, and he considered the course he had
taken on that occasion was the correct one. He, therefore,
would say that the discovery on the part of the Right. Hon.
Gentleman was of a very wrange description, if he had lately
discovered that the line of conduct he had pursued for twenty
years was not only inexpedient but unjust. The Right Hon.
Gentleman had availed himself of the Easter recess to make
that discovery, and he (the Marquis of Normanby) under-
stood that this measure was to he postponed till
after the Whitsuntide recess, and he hoped that he
would have also availed himself of that recess, and speedily
come to the conclusion that the measure ought not to be pro-
ceeded with—that he might, in fact, come to the conviction
that unnecessary coercion was not the way to inspire confidence ;
that it was not at. the time to which he alluded, that it never
had been, and that it never would be, as long as human na-
tare was what it always had been. But to what would the
argument of the Right Hon. Gentleman, that unnecessary
coercion was beneficial merely on account of the fear which it
was calculated to inspire—to what conclusion, he would ask.
would that lead ? He would say, that there was no despo-
tism—no autocracy provided ;it was only administered in a
particular manner, which might. not be justified upon ;those
grounds which the Right Hon. Gentleman had made use of on
the occasion alluded to. He (the Marquis of Normanby)
would therefore say, that this inference was not justified in
point of fact, and that it was dangerous in its general applica-
tion. And if that was really the sentiment of the Right Hon.
Baronet, they could only rejoice that it was not the sentiment
of a strong Minister, backed by the majority of nearly a hun-
dred. He (the Marquis of Iktorenanhy) felt it necessary to
bring this subject lief.re their Lot dehips in justification of the
conduct of himself arid his party ; and he felt it necessary, before
he sat down, to ask the Noble Earl opposite whether
it was the intentioe of the Government to proceed with this
measure.—( Hear, hear.) He felt certain that it was neither
the desire of their Lordships nor the country, that the Bill
should be held up in its present state of suspended animation.
If it was the intention of the Government to proceed with the
measure, let them at once meet that opposition which was
awaiting it elsewhere. He contended that it was trifling with
the country, if they did not at once proceed with or withdraw
this measure; but he believed it was not the intention of the
Government to proceed with it this session. He ought to apo-
'eszise to their Lordships for having thus occupied their time in
reference to a Bill which ha-clpaesed their Lordships' House, hut
he was anxious to make the statements which he had made, in
justification of his conduct with reference to Ireland. He
hoped, in conclusion, that the Noble Earl opposite would in-
form their Lordships what was the intention of her Majesty's
Ministers with respect to this measure.—( Hear, hear.)
Earl ST. GERMANS said it was quite unnecessary for the
Noble Marquis to have stated that he was absent from the
House mean the occasion he had alluded to; for inde-
pendent of the regret which they all felt that the
Noble Marquis should have been absent, he thought
that the Noble Marquis's absence sufficiently accounted
for his not being acquainted with the causes in which this
Bill had originated. In the autumn of last year the crime of
murder, and attempts at murder, had become so lamentably
frequent, that it became absolutely necessary to grant ad .
ditional powers to Government to repress it; and those powers
were not, asked for until all the powers then at the disposal of
Government had been employed to meet the evil without suc-
cess. It was with that conviction upon the minds of her Ma-
'esty's Ministers that they had deemed it their duty to advise
her Majesty to call the attention of both Houses c f Parliament
to the state of Ireland, and to adopt some measure whereby to
remedy the evil; and both Houses of the Legislature responded
to that recommendation. But the Noble Marquis had made it
a cause of complaint against her Majesty's Ministers, that they
had not peremptorily called for this measure. Now, he (Earl
St. Germans) would say, that he did not blush at her Ma-
jesty's Ministers having delayed to ask for such a measure,
for he said it was no light matter to ask for a measure
by which to abridge the constitutional right of the subject—
and the Government did hope that when her Majesty bad ex-
pressed her abhorrence of such a state of things as then ex-
isted in Ireland, and that the Government were prepared to
adopt such a measure as this, it would have had a good effect
in the disturbed districts ; but he regretted to say it had not
had that effect. He should also say that the Government did
deserve credit for the manner in which they had brought this
Bill forward ; and nothing also could be more creditable than
the conduct of Noble Lords opposite, who evinced no party
feeling whatever during the discussion ; and when a division
did take place (the only one which did occur) not a single
Peer connected with Ireland was to be found in the minority
upon the division. The Bill was sent down to the House of
Commons on the lath of March, and it. was not read a first
time till the Ist of May. For this delay the Government
were not responsible. The minority of both Houses pos-
sessed ;considerable power—( Hear, hear)—he thought that
it was a power which should he exercised with great discretion
The minority of the House of Commons had thought it right
to obstruct the progress of this Bill not only in that stage, but
they also announced that they would oppose it in all its future
stages. He believed it was the imperative duty of the Govern-
ment to proceed with the Bill in the manner they did. It was
in order to same time, and Fars the Bill as soon as possible,
that it was introduced to their Lordships' House first, and sent
down afterwards to the House of Commons. They hoped
to be able, when the public business was less pressing than at
present, to bring the Rill again under the notice of the House.
The Noble Marquis had attempted to turn into derision a pro-
vision in the Bill, urging the inhabitants of disturbed districts
to keep within their houses at particular hours but the
Noble Marquis, while he was making that attempt, must have
forgotten that a similar provision was introduced and passed in
a Bill which received the legislative sanction during his own
administratinn.—( Hear, hear.) In conclusion, he had only
to tell the Noble Marquis that the opinions of her Majesty's
Government, upon the subject of this Bill, remained still un-
shaken, and it was therefore their intention to persevere in the
measure. —(Heer. hear.)
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE thought the Noble Earl
had given a very extraordinary reason why the introduction
of the Bill was postponed. The Noble Earl had said that Go-
vernment was in hopes the declaration in the speech from the
throne upon the subject of crime in Ireland would have hail the
effect of suppressing those outrages, which had been of so fre-
quent occurrence in the sister country. and which were so ranch
deplored on all hands ; but in his (the Marquis of Clanri-
carde's) opinion, the Government had shown a want of deci-
sion, or want of judgment, in delaying the introduction of this
Bill, after they had received an intimation from Ireland that
such a measure leas necessary for the protection of life and pro-
perty in that country.—( Hear, hear.) He had only to repeat,
that he thought it was still the duty of Parliament to use every
consitutional means in their power to suppress outrage and
maintain the liberty of the subject. in Ireland.—( Hear. )
After a few words in explanation from the Earl of ST.
GERMANS, which did not reach the gallery,
The Duke of WELLINGTON said the Bill was in prepara-
tion before the session commenced, and Ministers were at the
same time in communication with the Irish Government upon it.
The law officers of the Crown, however, had to setae the Bill
before it could be introduced into Parliament, and of course
this occupied a good deal of the time after the commencement.
of the session.—( Hear.) It was that which prevented the Bill
being introduced earlier than it was.
The LORD CHANCELLOR spoke a few words in confir-
mation of what had fallen from the Noble Duke.
The Earl of WICKLOW said, in his opinion, so unconsti-
tutional a measure as a Coercion Bill ought never to have been
introduced, unless there was an absolute necessity for it, and
certainly not if Government did not intend to press it through
Parliament. The measure, it was said, was brought forward
for the protection of life and property in Ireland, and it was
-upon that ground that their Lordships passed it, but the
manner in which it was treated by Government in the other
House was perfectly disgraceful. They allowed measures of a
financial character to have precedence of it, and from what he
could learn from the public prints of what passed in the other
House, actually agreed that it should not be brought forward
for the second reading until the House allowed corn, and other
financial measures before the Howe, to be disposed of.—( Hear,
hear.) In his opinion, this was most disgraceful, for delay
would only render the Bill inoperative. Besides, if this pro
tection fur life and property was required by the people of Ire.
land, the Bill ought to be pushed forward at once, and passed
without a moment's delay.—( Hear, hear.)
The Marquis of NORMANBY said, from the language of
the Queen's speech, it would naturally have been inferred that
there was an absolute necessity for such a Bill, and that it was
the intention of Government to bring it in and press it for-
ward without any delay.—(Hear, hear.) There appeared
however, and in fact there was, a contradiction between such
language and the present course of the Government ; indeed
there was an actual contradiction between this language and
what had fallen from the Noble Earl opposite. The Noble
Earl did not say that the Bill would he proceeded with at
once, but only whenever the state of public business admitted
of is being proposed to the House of Commons to read the
Bill a second time.—( Hear, hear. )
The Earl of HAD DINGTON said it was quite impossible
that Government could press the measure forward faster than
they hail done, for their Lordships would remember that Par-
liament had been placed in such a position with regard to the
Corn Bill, that Government could not, consistently with their
duty to the country, have interposed any measure which
should have the effect of delaying its progress.—( Hear.)
The Duke of RICHMOND did not think with the Noble
Lord that the Government would have acted improperly if they
had not delayed proceeding with the Bill in consequence of the
threats of a minority of the House. The Government gave
way to threats too much. The Corn Bill was brought forward
in consequence of threats held out to them. The real reason
why the Government d:d not proceed with the Bill was, be.
cause they themselves were in a minority, and could not keep
a House. The Government had but 112 supporters, whereas
the Irish minority spoken of had been 125.
The Earl of H ADDINGTON stated that he did not refer
to the numbers who voted for the Bill, he only referred to the
small minority who opposed the Bill.
The Marquis of NOR MANBY would put an end to the
discussion by moving for the returns he had alluded to. At
the same time, it was his opinion that the Bill would not pass
into law.

The motion was then agreed to.
CORN-LAWS.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented a number of peti-
tions, from Cornwall and other places, against the repeal of the
corn-laws.

FATTENING CATTLE.
Lord BEAUAIONT presented a petition from a gentleman
who had made a number of experiments with malt for the
purpose of fattening cattle, praying their Lordships to take
the excise duty off that article. The petitioner stated that
malt was much better for the purpose than barley.
The LORD CHANCELLOR thought tae result of his
experiments were contrary to the opinion given before the
Committee.
The Duke of RICHMOND could bring forward a thousand
farmers, whose experience was of more weight than all the
theories of scientific men.

After a short discussion upon the comparative merits of bar-
ley and malt,
The Duke of RICHMOND stated that he knew a farmer,
residing close by the Noble Lord on the Woe!sack, who was
himself a great farmer, who considered that malt was prefer-
able to barley.
The LORD CHANCELLOR thought that perhaps the
individual referred to by the Noble Duke argued only by
analogy, he judged perhaps from the effects of malt on his own
person.
Several other petitions were then presented, and their Lord-
ships adjourned.

DOUSE OF COMMONS, May 22.
The SPEAKER took the chair at Four o'clock.
REPORTS.
The following reports were brought up and agreed to, and
the Bills ordered to be engrossed, viz.:—Hamilton New Gas,
Aston Rates, Gollon Inclosure, Airdrie Police, Caledonian In-
surance Company, Ayle.bury and Thames Junction Railway,
Midland, Barnsley, Sheffield, Dewsbury, and Bradford Rail.
way, York Improvement, Harrogate Waterworks, London and
South-Western Railway (Farnham and Alton branch), Read.
ing, Guildford, and Reigate Railway.
MARQUIS OF DONEGAL'S ESTATE BILL
This Bill was read a second time and ordered to be
committed.

THIRD READINGS.
The following Bills were read a third time, and passed :
Buckinghamshire Railway (Oxford and Bletchley Junction),
Rye and Derwent Drainage, Westruther Read, Greenlaw
Roads, Port Ellen Harbour, Carshalton Rates, Gra7esend and
tfilton Water Is orks.

WEXFORD, CARLOW, AND DUBLIN JUNCTION
RAILWAY.
Mr. GROGAN moved---" That it he an instruction to the
Committee of Seleeti )n to refer the Wexford, Carlow, and
Dublin Junction Railway Bill, being unopposed, to Mr.
Greene, end the Members in charge thereof."—The motion
was withdrawn.

The HON. GENTLEMAN also moved—" That it be an in-
struction to the Committee of Selection to refer the Dublin
Wide Streets Bill and the Dublin Cemeteries Bill to the same
Committee."—The mo'ion was agreed to.
GENERAL TERMINUS AND GLASGOW HAR-
BOUR BILL.
Mr. DENNISTOUN moved—" That in the case of the
General Terminus and Glasgow Harbour Railway Bill, Stand-
ing Order No. 121 be suspended, and the proposed amendments,
being merely verbal, be made on the third reading."—The
motion was agreed to.

YORK DIPROVEMENT BILL.
Mr. GREENE, on the bringing up of the report from the
Committee on the York improvement Bill, moved that the Bill
be re-committed to the former CommittE e. That the Com-
mittee have leave to sit and report on Monday next.—
Agreed to.

GLASGOW MUNICIPAL POLICE BILL.
Mr. APKENZIE presented a petition from some of the in-
habitants of Glasgow against the introduction of certain clauses
into this Bill, which would he the means of materially affecting
their interests. The p;tition was ordered to be laid on
the table.

LEEDS, WAKEFIELD, AND MIDLAND JUNCTION
RAILWAY BILL.

Mr. P. BENNETT presented several petitions against this
Bill.

CORNWALL RAILWAY.
Sir CHARLES LEMON presented 156 numerously signed
petitions in favour of this Bill.
BASINGSTOKE AND SALISBURY RAILWAY.
The same Hort. MEMBER also presented two petitions in
favour of this Bill.
Mr. BARNARD presented a petition in favour of Art
Union Societies.
Mr. HAWES presented a petition against the Highways
Bill.

Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL presented a petition from tenants
under Trinity College, and others interested in land in the
barony of Irraghticonnor, in the county of Kerry, praying the
House forthwith to carry into effect the recommendations of
Lord Devon's Commission, so far as regards the conversion of
College tenures into perpetuities; and to move that the peti-
tion be printed with the votes.
FREE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.
Mr. BAILEY presented a petition from Sirathaven, in
favour of the Bill of the Hon. Member for Montrose for
enabling parties to obtain sites for building churches.
AIR. W. S. 0. BRIEN.
Mr. D. O'CONNELL presented seventy petitions from
various parts of Ireland, signed by upwards of 60 000 persons,
praying the House to discharge W. S. O'Brien from custody.
TEN HOURS' BILL.
Mr. HUME presented a petition against the proposed Fac-
tories Regulation Bill.
Sir CHARLES NAPIER gave notice that he would, on
Monday nev, move for a return of the number of steam-
frigates built for the service of the Royal Navy.
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD gave notice that he would,
on Monday next, put a question to one of her Majesty's
Ministers for the purpose of learning whether it was the inten-
tion of Government to bring in a Bill founded on the report of
the Land Commission of Ireland.
RELIEF OF THE POOR (SCOTLAND.)
Mr. BOUVERIE wished to ask the Lord Advocate of Scot-
land whether a printed paper, entitled " Application for Relief,"
has been printed and circulated in Scotland, with the know-
ledge and sane ion of the Board of Supervision of the poor ; if
so, whether it has been with the sanction of the Lord Advocate
or Secretary of State for the Home Department ; and, if it has
been with their knowledge and sanction, whether the appli-
cants for relief are required to answer the queries contained in
that form of application before their claim to relief is consi-
dsred, or that claim allowed. There were twenty-three
queries in that paper to read over which would occupy the
House too long. Now according to the law of Scotland every
destitute person was entitled to relief, and he wasgiven to under-
stand that unless all these queries were filled up the
application for relief would be refused. What he wanted to
know, theretore, was, whether th.i circulation of that paper was
sanctioned by the Board of Supervision, and if so, whether re-
lief was refused unless those queries were answered.
The LORD ADVOCATE said, that with regard to the
first part of the question, he had to state, that the paper en-
titled, " Application for relief," had been printed
and circulated with the knowledge and sanction of the Board
He understood that the queries had been printed at the desire
of some persons as a form of queries to be put to parties apply-
ing for relief. By the statute persons applying for relief were
bound to answer such questions in order that the dis-
pensers of it might be enabled to judge of the
nature of their claim; but the parties so applying were
entitled to relief in the mean time ; he did not, however, be-
lieve that any one had been refused relief, because they were un-
able, or refused to reply to the questions. But if any one did
refuse, he might, by applying to the local judge, obtain instant
relief, that officer being empowered to grant it. The queries
were absolutely necessary, in order that the different parishes
might not be imposed upon.
The dropped orders of yesterday were then read.
BRIDPORT ELECTION.

Mr. CHRISTIE postponed his motion on this subject unti'
Thursday next.

RAILWAY COMPANIES' BILL.
Sir GEORGE CLERK expre.sed his intention of pro-
ceeding with this Bill after the other orders of the day had
been disposed of.

MR. SMITH O'BRIEN.
On the order of the day for the consideration of Mr. Smith
O'Brien's letter to the Speaker being read,
Mr. O'CONNELL moved that the minutes connected with
the committal of that gntleman be read.
The minutes having been read,
Mr. O'CONNELL said that it was his intention to state the
facts of the case as they really occurred, and to move a re<olu-
tion that the order of the 27th April should he discharged, it
being illegal in the first place, and obtained by gross mis-
representation to the ,House. Of course he did not impute
to the Honourable Gentleman any wilful misrepresentation,
of whic's he believed him to be perfectly incapable.
But he had, in his opinion, grossly misintormed the House,
which would never have made the order except upon his state-
ment. The gentleman represented himself to be the chairman
of the Committee of Selection, t.',e existence of which he
begged leave to deny. However, he called himself the chair-
man of it, and stated the substance of a correspondence
which took place between themselves and the Honour.
able Member for Limerick, aril upon tLat statement he ob-
tained the order which he now moved should be discharged.
Now if he was able to show that it was obtained on statements
founded on error, he considered he had a fair claim upon the
House to accede to his motion. He denied the existence of
the Committee of Selection. He granted that the
materials for such Committee existed, but that the
Committee itself existed he wholly denied. And now
he would direct the attention of the House very shortly
to another part of the subject, which, in his judgment,
was one of the utmost importance, and which, on consideration
of the matter, ought to be first attended to. They would
find that by the first standing, order of the House a Committee
of 42 Members was appointed, and by the second standing order
these were allowed to be divided intosub-Committees.eaeh Com-
mittee appointing its own chairman, and the next order decided
a Committee should be appointed every session, and that such
Committee should be a Select Committee of Standing. Orders.
It was enacted, and to this he begged the particular at-
tention of the House, that that Committee should he appointed
at the commencement of every session, and that it should con-
sist of the chairman of the standing orders, and the chairman
of Sub-Committees, three of whom was to form a quorum, and
that that Committee should be denomina'ed the Committee of
Selection. If that Commie ee had been formed at the com-
mencement of the session he would give up the question, but
he asserted that no such Committee had been appointed • that
no question of its appointment was brought before the douse ;
in short a total vacancy existed as to the formation of a
Select Committee. This brought the mat ter within
a very narrow e,-,mpass, and the letter which
had been rec, ived from the Chief Clerk showed clearly that
such a Committee had not been formed at the commencement
of this Session. He had taken the trouble to search the
votes on the journals of the House, and he could find
none such. But it had been suggested to him
that as the materials of the Select Committee were
in existence, it might be supposed to be fully
constituted, and that, therefore, its re-appointment on
every succeeding session was unnecessary. He utterly denied
that because it would deprive every Member of the House
of a right to which he was entitled. The House, it
was well known, did not appoint the Chairmen of the
Committees, they were elected by the Committees themselves.
He found in the Journals of the House, of the 23th of
February, 1845, that the order of the House had been moved,
relative to the appointment of the Committee of Se!ection ;
and that such an appointment was accordingly made fir
a similar order in the session of 1846. He found that
none such existed. No opportunity had been afforded to the
flon. Member for complying with the orders of the House.
He then had to consider the right of the COmmittee of Selection
to enforce his opinions. This was precisely the principle upon
which Mr. Smith O'Brien had acted, and when the Committee '
of Selection, he believed, had acted beyond their powers, he
refused to acknowledge their authority, and he believed
that it was quite in accordance with the rules of this House,
Mr. Smitn O'Brien had accordingly le fused to take any notice
of the application of the Committee of Selection. The ques-
tion then arose, whether the authority of the Committee
of Selection was to be attended to in preference to the rules of
the House of Commons. According to the rules as he under-
stood them, there was an express direction that this Committee
should act in accordance with the rules of the House.
He should therefore move, that as the Committee of Selection
had not, or. examination, ler en instituted in accordance
with toe rules of the House, that the order of the
27th of April should be discharged; and, secondly,
that Mr. Smith O'Brien should be remitted from
custody. If he succeeded in the first of these motions, the
second would follow as a matterof course, and Mr. S. O'Brien
would be discharged from custody. If he did not succeed in the
tint, he would have a right to take the sense of the House.
and he should therefore, on that point, move for the discharge
of Mr. Smith O'Brien.
Mr. ESTCOURT said, he had little or no answer to make
to the motion of the Hon. Member. Acecording to the
rules of the House there had been two Committees
established, which involved the whole of the question.
He need not tell the House what had been the course the
Hon. Member (Mr. Smith O'Brien) had thought proper to
pursue. But this much he might remind them of, that theseiio
several Committees had been appointed for carrying t? I
with as much view to the convenience of Members business of the country, and that they had been constituted
with
of b4eBrM embers,
rt
eek rulesha d
c(o)fmtmhiisttedthis
took e
exception.
pos-
sible. One of these Committees consisteHde
out the orders
Another andCorn-
was termed the
Committeemo m;
nai
ttuht Committee otih.
That
Selection.
holtoto carryingn
C
mittee was appointed for the purpoose_yembers,
and was called
of the House; it consisted of
istteeiee. M
It wast.ohmiAantimecimottnbeteerral
Committeeoae
rsn contravention
tnmi
hi
called
the Standing Orders' C
stated
o uustaetsews
were
the Committee of Selection.
ehe(Awlras
the Hon. Gentlemen
that unless that Committee was ap-
pointed grounds of that exception,
_
,„sit,o, it could not discharge the d •
tebveyrythe Housea.ndltL
Learned
eodn
Gentleman that po point that
at
signeissue as-
d
to
withn
Estcourt) conceived that the standing orders of the If
the laws which regulated the proceedings of the House of
the Hon.
Com-
mons. It was well known to the House, and, in fact, by
byothers, that the standing orders of the House wereulndot an'an-
nual piece of legislation, but were laws which wo
in force to govern the House of Commons until altereedonotrinue
re-
pealed. The Committee of Selection had been established for
several years—it was seven years, he thought, since they were
constituted, under the auspices of the H nise. Now, lie con-
tended that when the Standing Orders' Committee, or the
Committee of Selection had been consttiuted, that those Com-
mittees were appointed and established by the' express rules of
the House, and they
mast continue until altered
iotr w
adsi snsool vuendf;
equeffnet prwocaesedibngoronfetheouHtouisne
totahpisp,oinbteccaoums-e
mittees for various purposes each session, whose labours were
confined to that particular session of Parliament, unless they
became sessional orders by direction of the House. The dis •
tinction between Committees so appointed for a particular
purpose in one session of Parliament, and sessional orders,
which continued from session to session, until altered or re-
pealed by the House, was, in his opinion, perfectly evident,

With regard to Committees on Private Bills, did tit IIL
Member for Derby come to the House to move for the ap-
pointment of a Committee on a petition on a Private Bill ?
The Hon. Member did not submit a motion to the House.
He did not give notice that on a given day he should move for
the appointment of a Committee on a petition on a Private
Bill. He came to the House and directed that the standing
order shall be read, then nominated the Committee, and tin,'
nomination was entered on the journals. The same tieing 00'
curred with regard to himself when the standing order wee to
be appointed. He did not come to the House and give notice
of a motion, that the Committee on a standing order should be
appointed, but he came to the House and required that stand-
ing orders 3 or 4 should be read, and when they were read, be
nominated the Members to constitute the Standing Orders'
Committee. With regard to the Committee of Selection, be
was aware that at the beginning of last session there was an
entry on the Journals that the Committee of Selection was al)"
pointed, or was to be appointed, but he considered that that
entry was not regular; and en consulting the highest authority
he could consult on the subject this sessions, his apprehension
was confirmed by those authorities, viz.—that it was not ne-
cessary to enter the appointment of these Committees, if they
were appointed according to the proper construction
the standing orders. He contended that the nomination of
these Committees ought to be found in the journals of the
House. All Committees were appointed by the standing,
orders, and nothing more was necessary than to call out and
nominate the Members, and then turn to standing order 4,
and the entry made there. The appointment of the Com-
mittee was by the standing orders, but the nomination of the
Member was not by the House. At the same time that the
Committee was appointed, the Members were nominated, gene'
rally being the chairman of the standing orders, and the chair-
men of the Committees and Sub-Committees on petitions ell
Private Bills, and of whom three should be a quorum. 11;
considered that the appointment of the Committee was get'
With regard to their being no entry of the appointment of such
Committee, it was wholly unnecessary that there should be
such an entry upon the journals of the House, the Committee
bein constituted in accorance wit the standin orders.
It did g not appear to him that the Hon,h Gen leman hg ad rested
his objection on any other ground than informality, and be
trusted he had shown that the appointment was sufficient, and
that there had been no deficiency whatever in the forms which
had been followed. He did not think that any grounds what'
ever had been shown for the interference of the House. He
trusted, therefore, the House would see that the construction
be put upon the case was the correct one, and he hoped that it
would not take the view of the Hon. Member (Mr. O'Connell)
but would support the Committee of Selection.
Mr. WARBURTON thought the question should be con-
sidered totally irrespective of the case of Mr. Smith O'Brien;
The question for them to consider simply was whether the
Committee of Selection was appointed or not. If the construc-
tion of the Hon, Member for Oxford be the true tmet
the language would not have been "that a Committee be ap-
pointed at the commencement of every session ;" the lan-
guage would rather have been, " That the chairman of the
Select Committee on standing orders, and the chairmen of
the Sub-Committees on petitions far private Bills be a Com-
mittee for such and such purpo<es." That clearly would have
been the language of the standing order, had it been the in-
tention of the House that the sessional order should be con-
tinued in the sense taken of it by the Hon. Member for Ox-
ford. But wht, had appointed this Committee ? It was quite
clear that some one must have appointed it. The Committee
could not appoint itself. The Speaker, he believed, had not
appointed it, and again he must ask who had appointed the
Committee ? He thought it better that they should confess
at once that there had been some negligence shown some-
where or other, or that some misinterpretation of the words of
the standing order had taken place, and, therefore, the sooner.
they returned to the reading of the Act, the sooner "souk'
they do justice to the Hon. Member, and to that House itself.
Sir GEORGE GREY said that, in his opinion, the words
of the statute were to be interpretated in precisely a similar waY
with the wording of other private Bills, and the House had_
sanctioned by many precedents this view of the case. 11,:
found, in reference to the nomination of Committees on private
Bills, that the standing order No. I should be moved at the
commencement of every session. He found that that order was
that the Committee should consist of 42 Members, five to be a
quorum in opposed cases and three a quorum in cases not 471-
posed. But the House did not in every case require that this
order should be substantiated by a motion. He found indeed
that with the exception of 1845, the
year adverted to by tae
Hon. and Learned Member for Cork, it had never been deemed
necessary to adopt this course. The Hon. Member had re-
fused to comply with the call made by the House; be
therefore guilty of contempt, and he had been accordingly com-
mitted.—( Hear, hear.)
Sir. STURT said, there was no doubt that some difficulty
arose from the method in which the standing order was framV_,.
but at the same time, looking at the words, and also at what
had been the practice of the House. He did- not think
they could have any difficulty at arriving at a decision. All
the Committees of the House had been appointed by the same
order, which only required that a Committee should be ar
pointed at the commencement of the session ; and it could not
be clone otherwise, for the Speaker could not, consistently with
his duty, have put a question to the House which would have
negatived its own authority, which, he contended, would be
the case if, having ordered the appointment of a Committee by
a sessional order, they put it in the power of the Member to
make lightiof that appointment. It stated that these Committees
should be appointed at the commencement of each session,
and the order recommends that these selections should be re'
ported to the House. He could not speak of the perfect accu-
racy of the phraseology employed, but such as it was they
were bound to act upon it. The words made use of were--
"shall be appointed;" and he was not of opinion
_
ae,
that the terms of a standing order were to be
construed with the strictness of a phrase of an Act
Parliament, or of a bill of indictment, but still in taking these
words in their common sense of construction, it was impossible
for the Standing Orders' Committee to act otherwise titan they
had done. With such an impression he could not help voting
with the Hon. Member for Oxford on this occasion, and giving
his decided opposition to the motion.
Mr. O'CONNELL thought that the Right Hon. Menthe!
for Devonport had entirely misapprehended the terms of his
motion. Its object was not that Mr. O'Brien be immediately
discharged from custody, but that he should be discharged to
attend the Committee to which he had been appointed. He
must say, that he trusted the decision to which the House was
about to come would be more in accordance with commen
souse than were the terms of the standing orders on which
Mr. O'Brien was committed.—( Laughter.) What might be the
meaning of the terms of the standing orders under which Mr.
O'Brien was committed he could not pretend to say, but he
trusted the House would not become wiseacres to interpret it
—( Laughter)—but certainly it would be out of rule to inter-
pret it according as the Standing Orders' Committee had made
it out. The wording of the standing order, as he would
comprehend it, was at variance with common
sense, and he thought in violation of all the rules
of grammar. He thought then that on consideration
the House would perceive that it would be impossible to con-
fine Mr. Smith O'Brien, when the phraseology of the standing
order was so contradictory in itself, especially when they eeesne
,
sidered how many persons were interested in the result. On
this occasion, therefore, he trusted that the House would look
upon the question as he viewed it, and with that hope he move
that Mr. Smith O'Brien be discharged.
eMsar
said
eAhKo
hoped
Yt h
ar ot stet;
sa m
questioni d s lou d
would cries
noof
t"be Divide,d eeideddi vide."
wth
out the officers of the Crown stating their opinion of it.."
(" Oh ! oh !" and cries of " No. no")—for he was sure,
in consequence of what had transpired before on this subjects,
that if it was not debated and decided on the grounds. of
common sense, and on the words of the standing order, that
great dissatisfaction would be felt by the country, and still
greater dissatisfaction by the Members of that House on some
t°7.
future occasion, when they themselves might be placed 1.
similar position to Mr. Smith O'Brien. Now, could anything
he plainer than the words of the order:—" At the commence'
ment of every session the Committee shall be appointed":
(Several Hon. Members here called nut, "Be appointed")
—For his Honourable Friend the Member for Ken-
dal, had in his (Mr. Wakley's) opinion, given a correct
interpretation of the words. The right interpretation of that
order was as plain and obvious to his (Mr. Vs'akley's) appre•
hension as anything they could place before him. New, what
ad been the practise of the preceding session ? No one had
asked that question. Was there a precedent for the course
they had taken? He put that question to the House, and if
there was not he was at a loss to know on what right they had
now a gentleman, one of their Members, in custody ? It was, at
the very best, a doubtful proceeding. But would they interpret
the law in its most stringent sense ? Why should they not say
to this gentleman, " We don't think you have been very wises
and it is not pleasant that our wisdom should be discussed; we
) of
will let you out, and let us shake hands ?"—( Laughter.
did not think that any degree of want of dignity would attach
to such a course ; but, at any rate, it was the honest courste-e:
oe
for it was plain and obvious that a mistake had been committed,
and he thought they ought not to make another person Ile'
for their own fault.
• t but
Mr. AGLIONBY said it was not his inteyneatdaioidpffnpeortienonttebdianv:e
troubled the House with any observations on this subject,
the
as the Hon. Gentleman had raised a technical objectior. to _
order, and insisted that the House had made a mistake,
which opinion he could not coincide, he wished to occupy
attention attention for but a few moments. He would not give hi
sent to the opinion of the Hon. Gentleman, that the law officers
of the Crown ought to express their opinion of the order,
had it
be-
fore the House adopted any steps respecting it ; for, lieu;
been a question of mere law, it might have been necessary.; _
have received their opinion, but in this case they would not be
considered other than simply Members of the House. The__
orders had been drawn up by the House, and therefore it Yr.a!
the House who were only competent to discuss them, and who
ought to be appealed to as to their construction, or to alter and_
repeal them, so that the other Members of the House were a!
competent to discuss their merits as the Hon. and Learned
e
Gentlemen opposite. The question arose on the words b
appointed." The Hon. Member for Derby bad addnucetd. argu-
ments
for
K e
Kendall
iclh took seemedexc
exception
ob
nc poliftsi;ainohlwi
these
igee.Thnawtht:lebrneydaHnsttutoei,hrrn:ee.b:
Hon. Member
s
conviction on the reason of the thing, but th
that
r,uments, and said
HMoeums
House
Member
seflo:
the words " be appointed";..se.yu
tention on the part of the nut'
Committee of Selection, or did the
construction of the words;
mCoerakntstaatteledastthsantm,
h construction on the •
standing
House, wish to place a b
r ) He for one would, with all possible
fworerceornkoweorethteer
Did any member eoinfsethrte_:aLrsai
readiness,
order, ?--(Haegarre,ahetao •
such
would a,.mit of the discharge from custody of
as
consequences to follow
such a step.—(Hear, hear.) At present they were to discuss
the matter as if the Hon. Gentleman
never was in custody
and never had been committed. If the ar ents of the Hen•
be tgarein,. every'proceect leg of the Committee on standing
aenldr.Leemarinthed Omlribeenr,
orders, and of all Coale
mittees appointed) by that body, nth;
and void. If the Comnaittee of would be entirely a _
pointed, so as to have no authority,Selection were never.rr.
it would be vicious, and ever
every act emanatingltteeel
on Groups of Railwa y proceeding of the Coma" Tee
ys would be in like manner void.
House might remedy this b a vote, orb y , .llwhich would sane'
tion the proceedings of these matter
Committees ; but that was of comparatively email
obser-
vations to the sin le import.words, He would confine his -
maintained
"be appointed " He main
that the Committee had been constitutionally, and
d „
strictly according to the wordsapopfoitnhtee
standing
orders. ecei
was not ter
necessary that the Committee should be app
by the House, as the Hon. Men her had construed the order
to mean ; neither was it necessary that it should be apeoi?,lceh
in the House. It was virtually appointed by somethinghad previously been done by the House. The Hon. Dfember
also said, that the House had not the appointment of the
chairman. The moment the House named the materials for
•
the Committee, the standing orders, No. 4, came an force,
and ipso facto the appointment was made.' This was s-ques
tion for the House to decide, for the Committee had been ar•
pointed by the House, and not by any Member of the Govern
ment, and he hoped it would not be thought that any lieu
•
Member had taken it in any other light. wished
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that he only
_ake
to make one remark. He could feel it was unnecessary to meth
any comment on the motion before the House after the sali.evp'ut
of the Hon. Baronet the Member for Davenport, who it
from
the question in its proper light, mid made any remarks
him wholly uncalled for.
She Home
Lord POLLING TON said that the question for
in
to consider was, whether or not a mistake had been. made
do
the committal of the Hon. Member. They had nothingto
with the inconvenience which might arise out of rectifyinge
an
error.—( Hear, hear.) If a mistake bad been madteo,neletlie:
House give the Hon. Member the benefit of it by 1.1
u bad only t.O
charging him from custody.—( Hear, hear.) —43
say that, having great doubts as to the construction of the