The Sun.
London, England, 1848-02-12 00:00:00

Bruce, one of the nominated members, was not in the r
House,
Mr. FOX MAULE said it now became his pain-
ful duty, in consequence of the Hon. Mem-
ber not being in his place one hour after
the House had met, to move, under the 67th section
of the Act of Parliament, that he be taken into custody
by the Sergeant-at-Arms. In making the motion,
he must take the opportunity of drawing the attention
of Hon. Members to the rules which prevailed in the
nomination of those Committees. It appeared to him
that such cases as the one he was now dealing with
arose from the circumstance of Hon. Members not
being sufficiently attentive in consulting the panels
upon which their names were placed ; and he would
most earnestly recommend Honourable Members,
not so much with the view of saving themselves
trouble, as for the purpose of saving trouble and ex-
pense to the parties concerned, that they should
consult the panels in which their names were placed
every day during the time the panel was under con-
sideration. With these observations it was his
painful duty to move the resolution which he had
just read.
Sir R. H. INGLIS suggested that in future
the notices issued by the General Committee of Elec-
tions should be delivered to Honourable Members
bona fade through the hands of an officer of the House.
Mr. FOX MAULE directed the attention of the
Hon. Baronet to the third section of the Act of
Parliament, wherein it is stated that the clerk of the
General Committee of Elections should give notice in
writing to each Member who should be chosen to
serve on Election Committees.

- -- - - -
Sir R. H. INGLIS said his suggestion was quite
consistent with the Act, which evidently required
that the notices should be personally delivered by an
officer of the House.

Lord HARRY VANE did not see the necessity
of a personal service, but in his opinion four or five
days' notice ought to be given to Honourable Mem-
bers before they were called upon to serve on these
Committees.

Mr. AGLIONBY agreed with the suggestion of
the Noble Lord. The summons which he received
to serve on this Committee did not reach him till late
last night. He did not attribute this to the neglect
of the officer whose duty it was to deliver it, because
it sas left at his house so early as four o'clock yes-
terday afternoon, but at that hour ho had left home
to attend the House, and, no doubt like many other
Members, he did not return till late at night.—(Hear.)

Sir W. HE ATHCOTE said the General' Com-
mittee of Selection were bound, under the Act of
Parliament, to give the notices on the day of selection,
and they had no authority to interfere with the rules
laid down by the Act. It was the province of the
House, and not of the Committee, to make the
alterations suggested by Honourable Members.
He trusted therefore that his Right Hon. Friend and
the other members of the Committee would be
exonerated from any blame.—(Hear, hear.)
Dr. BOWRING said there was no complaint of
the conduct of the Committee, but he thought the
hardship was considerable.
Mr. THORNELY said that in the votes of the
House there was fourteen days' notice given of the
day on which the Committee was appointed, and the
panel from which the Committee would in taken.
He thought, therefore, Honourable Members could
not blame the House.
Mr. FORBES was sure that the Hon. Member
had no intention wilfully to absent himself; he trusted,
therefore, that the House would allow him to move

that the debate on the subject should be adjourned
till Monday.
The SPEAKER doubted whether he could put
the motion, because the Act was imperative in its
provisions, that when a Member who had been ap-
pointed on an Election Cummittee did not appear
within an hour from the sitting of the House, he
should be taken into the custody of the Sergeant-at-
Arms.

Mr. F. MAULE believed the Act was imperative,
and that the House had no discretion ; he should,
therefore, move that the Sergeant-at-Arms be ordered
to take the Hon. Member into custody.

Mr. HORSMAN suggested the withdrawal of the
motion, upon the understanding that all fees should
be paid, and the subject considered on Monday.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that the adoption of such a course would be incon-
sistent with the the dignity of the House and a waste
of their time, as the Act was imperative.—(Hear.)
Mr. HORSMAN—Then does the Right Hon.
Gentleman mean that the Hon. and Gallant Member
should be in custody to-morrow and Sunday ?
F The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—
Certainly. It was his duty to attend the House
having been appointed on the Committee.—(Hear.)
The SPEAKER having put the question, that the
Sergeant-at-Arms be ordered to take the Hon. and
Gallant Member into custody, strangers were ordered
to withdraw.

In a few minutes the gallery was opened, when we
found that the motion had been agreed to without a
division.
THE GREAT MARLOW ELECTION COM-
MITTEE.

The Members of this Committee were then called
to the table, aid Sir Robert Price being absent,
Mr. F. MAULE said Sir Robert Price, the
Member for Hereford, not having attended in his
place within one hour after the sitting of the
House, to be sworn as one of the members of the
said Committee, he felt it his duty to move that he be
taken into custody by the Sergeant at-Arms.
Mr. V. SMITH said, when an Hon. Member
moved that the debate on the last motion be adjourned,
the Speaker told him that he could not do so. If the
Act was imperative with respect to the committal of a
Member who did not appear, he could not see the
necessity of making a motion on the subject, and was
surprised that one was about to take place. As the
same thing might occur again, he begged to ask
the Hon. Gentleman to explain the law, and whether
the motion must be agreed to as as a matter of course,
or whether it was open to discussion ?
The SPEAKER read the 66th clause, which stated

that if a Member, summoned on an Election Corn-
mittee, did not appear when called upon that he
should be ordered to be taken into custody. By the
old Act a motion was made that the Members so
absenting themseelves be taken into custody; and
though it was not imperative under the new regula-
tion, he had thought it well to adhere to
the ancient mode. It might be open to
discussion whither a Member could be committed to
the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms by the Speaker
alone.

Mr. HORSMAN said, in the event of the arrest
of a Member being agreed to, the Sergeant-at- Arms
or his officer was compelled to follow him
even into Scotland or Ireland, and he was
liable to pay all th• expenses.—(Hear, hear.)
A Member might be absent from accident; end,
therefore, he thought the House should take care that
Members had full notice. The putting of the motion
showed that it might some to a division, and, of
course, if this came on a discussion might take place,
and any one might move an amendment; and the
Member himself, or his friends, might be enabled
to state some mitigating circumstances to entitle the
absent Member to the consideration of the House.

He believed that the notices were only served last
night, and it was just possible that they did not reach
the residences of the Members until after they might
have gone off to dinner, or left town by the mail.
He invariably looked at the votes every
morning to see if he had been appointed
a Member of any Committee; no notice, howver, ap-
peared in the votes until Members were actually ap-
pointed ; their nomination did not appear, and con-
sequently a Member might easily be inadvertently
absent.

Mr. HUME said that no doubt, with respect to the
-

practice of the House, the Speaker was quite correct
He thought, however, that by the terms of the Act it
was imperative upon the Speaker to cause the Hon.
Member to be taken into custody without any mo-
tion whatever.—(Hear, hear.) He thought it most
important that every Hon. Member should attend
and perform the duties required of him, and
if he were not present when required it
was the duty of the House to order that he should be
taken into custody.
Sir G. GREY said, that no doubt it was quite
lawful to order the party to be taken into custody
immediately.
Mr. MUNTZ was of opinion that the present
Honourable Member ought not to be allowed
to escape. There was great danger in not
keeping strictly to the Act of Parliament. If the
first Member had been allowed to escape, the second
would have escaped. All the Hon. Members had the
same notice, and it was their business to attend in
their places. The business of the House ought not
to be allowed to stand still in consequence of the non-
attendance of any of the Members.—(Hear, hear.)
The motion was then agreed to without a division.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.
It was ordered that the House, at its rising, do
adjourn until Monday.
VAGRANT POOR.
Mr. MILES wished to know whether it was the
intention of the Government to bring in any measure
for the purpose of putting an end to the evils attend-
ing the large increase which had taken place in the
numbers of the vagrant and tramping poor of this
country.
Mr. C. BULLER said that his attention had
been directed to the subject, and if it should be ne-
cessary to require the intervention of the House in
the matter, the Government would certainly not delay
introducing a measure calculated to meet the case.
PAYMASTERS AND PURSERS.
Captain PECHELL wished to know from the
Secretary of the Admiralty whether it was intended
to make provision in the Estimates for completing the
retired list of paymasteis and pursers to the numbers
recommended in the report of the Committee of Flag
Officers in 1842 ; and also, whether the Board of