The Sun.
London, England, 1848-03-03 00:00:00

11414 it I); TY 14, I, ti o

Noble Lord had addressed to Prince Metternich had
been quoted on a recent occasion in the House, and it
would appear from that document that the Noble Lord
had protested as strongly against the interference of
Austria in Italy.—(Hear, hear.)
The Earl of SURREY seconded the motion.
Viscount PALMERSTON—Sir, I am not aware that
I have any objection to make to the motion of the lion.
Gentleman, but of course he will specify the extracts of
which he desires to have copies. I am sorry to say
that I must bear my testimony be the accuracy of the
description which the Hon. Gentleman has given of
the present state of Greece, whether that testimony be
given with reference to the mode in which the financia
affairs of the country are regulated, or whether it be
offered with respect to the manner in which the con-
stitution has been worked, or whether it be even with
regard to the way in which the executive powers deal
with the people of the country. At present there is no abso-
lute necessity of speaking harshly in this House with re
bard to the administration of the affairs of other countries;
but, as the Hon. Gentleman has stated, this country-
stands with respect to Greece in a position totally dif-
ferent from that in which she stands towards other
countries. We have not only rights, but obligations
and duties in respect to Greece, which do not apply to
countries in regard to which our position is altogether
indifferent.—(Hear, heard) England was one of the
three Powers which, by their interposition between
Turkey and Greece, finally accomplished the indepen-
dence of the Greek nation, and the erection
°I. Greece into a separate kingdom. England
able Was one of the Powers to whom was
given the choice of choosing a Sovereign to reign
over Greece; and England was one of the three Powers
by whose representatives was drawn up the proclamation
announcing to the Greeks the selection of their Sove-
rei—n,
8 and giving a pledge that that Sovereign should
give to the Greek nation a constitutional system of go-
vernment.—(Hear, hear.) We, therefore, do stand in
the position of parties who have undertaken certain
Obligations towards the people of Greece; and those
obligations—as far as properly lies in our power—l am
ready to say we are bound in honour to see carried out.
--(Hear, hear.) There are questions connected ;with the
present motion which would make me averse to enter into
any discussion of the matter, or go into the details which
the Hon. Gentleman has touched upon; I, therefore,
shall only say that if he so shape his motion as to specify
some particular periods, and the copies and extracts
Which he chooses to produce, I can make no objection to
it; or, perhaps, he might withdraw his present motion,
and then show me the motion as he would wish it to
stand. We may settle it together, and I shall be happy
to give him any information which it would be useful for
the House to have laid before it.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. B. COCHRANE accepted the suggestion, and
Withdrew his motion.
THE NEW HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT.

Sir R. INGLIS, in moving for the appointment of a
Select Committee to inquire into the present state of the
new Houses of Parliament, entered at some length into
a review of the animadversions which had fallen from
Ron. Members on several occasions relative to the
excess of expenditure which had occurred over the
original estimate. He entered into details to show that
the excess had arisen from outlays which were not anti-
cipated at the time the original estimate was decided
upon, and contended that no party could be blamed fur
having incurred the expense in question. The outlay
could not be prevented, and ought to have formed part
of the original estimate. He thought that Hon. Members,
in their anxiety to find fault, had overlooked the cir-
cumstance that, in addition to giving employment to
industrious and ingenious artisans and artists, a consi-
derable part of the expense was returned in the shape
of duties paid upon certain portions of the materials.
It had been calculated that not less than 25 per
cent. of the outlay required in building a house was ab-
sorbed in duties. If, therefore, Hon. Gentlemen would
take that circumstance into account, they would find that
a deduction to some extent ought in fairness to be made
from the sum expended on the works of the new Houses
of Parliament. He thought that much exaggeration had
prevailed on the subject of that expense. The point at
issue was not so much whether the original estimate had
not been exceeded, but whether the excess was not fairly,
and necessarily, and unavoidably incurred. He was not
one of those who blindly idolised the talents of the great
architect employed. Many members of the Committee
knew that he (Sir R. Inglis) held a very qualified opinion
with regard to the perfect propriety of all that Mr.
Barry had done, although he never doubted his extra-
ordinary talents and skill. Language had been used of
Mr. Barry, in respect of this great work, which, he was
sure, none of his friends could wish should have been un-
aipployed, inasmuch as it had produced a revulsion in
his favour. In conclusion, however, he hoped that, if
this Committee should be appointed, its results
would not be so unsatisfactory as former proceedings
in connexion with this question seem to have been. The
non. Baronet then moved for the appointment of a " Se-
lect Committee on the present state of the new Palace at
Westminster, with a view to the reception and accom-
modation of this House therein, and the probable expense
of its completion ; and also to inquire into the present
state of Westminster-bridge ; the Committee to consist
of Sir R. H. Inglis, Viscount Morpeth, Sir Robert Peel,
Earl of Lincoln, Mr. Herries, Mr. Cardwell, Mr. Ste-
phenson, Mr. Wilson Patten, Mr. Hume, Lord E. Bruce,
Mr. Deering, Mr. Stafford, Mr. Tufnell, and Mr. Evelyn
Denison."
The motion having been seconded,
Mr. OSBORNE rose to move, as an amendment, an
address to the Crown, " praying her Majesty to appoint
Commissioners to superintend the expenditure of the
amount voted by this House for the new Houses of Par-
liament, with a view to make such arrangements as shall
complete the building at the earliest period." His object
in moving this amendment was not founded in any dis-
respect for the Honourable Baronet, Mr. Barry, or any
one else, but in the principle that that House was the
guardian of the public purse.—(Hear, hear.) When he
had last referred to this subject, the Noble Lord who
replied to him spoke in a manner which seemed to
infers that this new building was necessarily a great
work, because it contained upwards of six hundred
rooms, and covered such a large space of ground ;
but it was no answer to himself or to the House of
Commons, who desired to know who was the responsible
officer to control the enormous expense connected with
this building, to say that the building itself was a great
work, and that Mr. Barry was a great architect.—(Hear,
hear.) There appeared to have been no control exer•
cised either over the architect or tho expenditure. The
Secretary of the Admiralty had taunted that House, the
other night, with always allowing a great expenditure
to regard to the navy ; and he (Mr. Osborne) called
Upon them not to allow the same taunt to be hereafter
applied to them in regard to this question of the new
'louses of Parliament. One reason for his amendment

/41.48, thathe ToilLTthat there had never been any corn-
Mateo on this subject that had not, instead of diminish-
ing, added to the expense of the building. The corn-
Mateo of 1836 increased the charge by some 60,000/
or 80,0001. for putting in all those statutes of monarchs
AaY 'now saw there, but which would not be dis-
guishable in two years hence. He had himself
dabbled a little in architecture, and it was his opinion,
and oae in which he was fortified by others, that
the design was being frittered away in details, and that
to the end it would be a little better than a large metro-
politan asylum for birds' nests and soot.—(Hear.) In
1841, too, what was called a Fine Arts Committee was
appointed, which had been the cause of other great
expenses. Against certain acts of that Committee, the
very artists themselves had petitioned the House of
Lords—that gorgeous gothic gewgaw, which no one
Would have the hardihood to assert was adapted to the
trposes of a deliberative assembly.—(Hear.) The
lion. Gentleman then referred to the expense of the
building of the new Houses, and said that, according to
the return which had been laid on the table, the original
a,stimate, which was between 700,0001. and 800,0001.,
bad been largely exceeded, and that the money already
!gent had amounted to 1,016,000/.—(Hear, hear.) The
4-4°ll- Gentleman then called attention to the report o a
Committee appointed in 1828, on the motion of Sir. H.
.rarnell, on the subject of Parliamentary Committees,
which stated that the Committee could not help re-
Marking that it was most desirable that Parlia-
II:lent should at once establish a more permanent and
Perfect system of revision. This was the advice a Com-
mittee geve in 1828, nearly twenty years ago. Why
had it not been acted upon ? The building would have
been much better attended to ; indeed, in his opinion,
the whole of the business of the House was done by
about thirty Members, and the rest might very well be
discharged.—(A laugh.) The report added that changes
in the directing body always created expense—(Cheers)
--besides which he had strong authority in thus moving
for the appointment of a Commission. Sir Robert Peel
Was of this opinion, as was shown by the questions he
put to the Commission of 1836. He then asked, " It it
had ever occurred to the Commissioners whether they
Could not make arrangements for the completion of the
sew Houses of Parliament ; sad whether, for that pur-
tose, it would not be better to appoint permanently some
the
or persons to attend to it." The answer was "Yes
the expenses are increased by an inefficient control of the
executive." Sir Robert Peel added, " I think so too ;"
tld however they might differ from the Right
99. Baronet on many points, he was the first ad-
Ministrator in this country, and that answer ought to
Induce every Member in the House to second him (Mr.
Osborne) to obtain this commission. Neither did he
want for a precedent, for a similar commission was tip.
t'ut,nted to attend to the alterations at Windsor Castle;
and as there were no complaints made, he presumed it
answered well, and the expenditure was kept within the
elt•
istates.—(Cheers.) How different was the case in
who were well acquainted with the subject, said we
should not get out of that place for less than 4,000,000/.
tka would ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer where
,40 money was to come from? Did the Right Hon.
f trentleinan mean to take that too out of the balances in
‘`
▪ he
Exche ner?—(Cheers, and laughter.) If the House
obj„
fo„ ted toq his proposition, they had better at once
"ow the recent example of the Government, and dole-
4a.te their functions to a Select Committee. If the House
td not choose thus to neglect its duty, it would agree
th him in moving " An address, praying her Majesty
to l
appoint Commissioners to superintend the expendi-
ture of the amount voted by this House for the new
uses of Parliament, with a view to make such arrange-
mentsa es shall complete the building at the earliest
period
FLord MORPETH did not oppose the motion from any
oL°InLY of the functions of the Board of Woods and
:,rests. That department had endeavoured to discharge
as duties faithfully, but it was sometimes expected that
v,e, Commissioners were to fulfil all the duties which de-
keyed
Upon a Minister of Works. He was himself
ett4:4U' upon to give opinions on matters which required
..0 education sometimes of a land steward, of a practical
trtr, an architect, an inspector of mines, a valuer of
Part In er, and a practical engineer. He felt that the de-
the was not sufficiently organised to discharge all
eollatuittuiews which would would properly devolve upon a regularly
of works. But neither this depart-

wont nor the Governmeat wished to shrink from any
responsibily which was feirly attached to either, and
when his lion. Friend asked who was responsible, the
answer was the Government, and particularly the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, were responsible for the
estimates proposed yearly to the House, and the Board
of Works was responsible for duly inspecting all the
accounts. In the abstract, he should rather agree with
his Hon. Friend who had moved the amendment than
with the original motion in regard to incurring expen
diture on the ground of giving employment, but when
the ancient Houses of Parliament were destroyed,
and it became necessary to erect a now abode, the
building should be made worthy of the high
office to which it was dedicated.—(Hear, hear )
His Hon. Friend had accused him of praising the archi-
tect; but, when a building was attacked, that seemed
the natural defence, and he had certainly referred to the
manner in which Mr. Barry had discharged his duties,
in justification of the expenses the House had been
willing to incur. The earlier speeches of his Hon.
Friend had certainly been attacks upon Mr. Barry, but
he was glad hi sllon, Friend hed now recanted, for he
would rather his attacks were concentrated upon him
(Lord Morpeth) than upon one so little deserving of
them as the architect. llis Hon. Friend had not named
the eminent architects who agreed with him in his dis-
paragement of the building; but he (Lord Morpeth:
would read the (-pinion expressed by Mr. Playfair, who
had so highly distinguished himself by the buildings he
had erected in Scotland—(Hear, hear)—in a letter
which had been placed in his (Lord Morpeth's) hands.
[The Noble Lord hero read the extract, which was
highly eulogistic of the architectural merits of the new
Houses of Parliament, and predicted an immortality of
fame for Mr. Barry.] His lion. Friend had pronounced
the House of Lords a gewgaw, and many might have
preferred a simpler taste, but Mr. Barry felt that as
thatj was the.:, place where the Sovereign met the
estates of the realm, where the representatives of
Foreign Powers, and a great part of the beauty and
nobility of the country congregated on solemn occa-
sions, that a grand and imposing structure would be
in keeping.—(dear, hear.) And every one who had
witnessed the ceremony tit the close of Parliament last
session would admit that a nobler„ grander scene than
the House of Lords on that occasion had been seldom
seen.—(Hear.) However, he had received the assurance
of Mr. Barry that on coming to that part of the edifice
appropriated more to matters of fact a more severe and
simple style should be adopted, and a profuse expense
would not be incurred. As to the disputes between Mr.
Barry and Dr. Reid, when he had felt it impossible to
bring those gentlemen to a good understanding ho felt it
his duty to prevent the time of Parliament from being
frittered away, and he had insisted upon Dr. Reid put-
ting on paper all that he required to develop his plans;
and Mr. Barry then professed his readiness to carry them
into effect. That had now been done, and he believed
all that related to the ventilation of the House of Com
mons and its appurtenances had been placed before Mr.
Barry, and that Mr. Barry had engaged to give effect to
the design. There had been some dispute relative to
the height of the tower Dr. Reid required. As that was
a point he (Lord Morpeth) was unable to decide, ho
should be glad to have it referred to a more compe-
tent authority; and it would be a point that might
be investigated by the Committee now moved for. This
was not an occasion to go into the question of the fres-
coes to which his Hon. Friend had given an unduly se-
vere character, and one not warranted in the opinion of
the best judges of that branch of arts; but, as to the
supposed incongruity of those frescoes with the building,
he might refer to the Campo Santo at Pisa for one of
the must successful specimens of frescoes in Gothic ar-
chitecture. He did not wish prematurely to condemn
his Hon. Friend's proposal of a Royal Commission, and
there had been a precedent for such a course in the case
of the Windsor improvements; but it was not certain
that such a Commission would succeed in working out
the economical views of his lion. Friend. He could not
accede to the proposition of his Hon. Friend for a Royal
Commission, but if it were the wish of the House that
a Committee should consider the whole present state of
the building, and even the past expense, and to settle the
basis upon which it would be best to proceed for the
future, the Government felt it their duty to accede to
that wish, and he had told his Hon. Friend the Member
for Oxford that ho would support his motion. When
that Committee was appointed, it might be a legitimate
subject of inquiry by them whether the scheme of his
Hon. Friend fur a Royal Commission should be adopted,
or any other course that might be suggested for the
speedy and economical completion of the building.

Sir B. HALL did not think the Committee would
answer its intended object, fur the Government would
be apt to screen themselves behind the report of that
Committee, and he was especially of that opinion when
he found that the Committee had been. concocted with
the concurrence of the Noble Lord. But he objected
even more to the names placed upon the Committee, for
he thought that Lord Morpeth and Lord Lincoln, the
present and late Commissioners of Woods and Forests,
and Sir it. Peel, ought rather to appear as witnesses be-
fore the Committee than sit as members. Ilia Hon.
Friend the Secretary to tip-, Treasury had also quite
enough to do without being engaged upon the Commit-
tee. He hoped that the Noble Lord would press for the
completion of the work; he would find that, whatever
might be the present expense, such a course would, in
the end, prove to he by tar the most economical. He
would oppose the nomination of the Committee, and
if the motion were carried, he would object to several of
the names.

The Earl of LINCOLN deprecated the practice of
that House resolving itself into a dilettanti society, and
discussing matters of taste ; he did not think that by
such a mode of proceeding they would arrive at any sa-
tisfactory cura:.•,lusion. The proper function of the House
in a matter of this kind was to see that the money it
had voted should be properly applied Although he
had found that each successive Committee appointed to
inquire into matters relating to the new Houses of Par•
liament had resulted only in increasing the expenses of
that building, he would have been prepared to vote fur
this Committee, in the expectation that no such conse-
quences would, in this case, follow, had it not been for
an expression of hope on the part of the Noble
Lord that the question now pending between
Mr. Barry and Dr. Reid, as to the height of the
central tower, would be referred to the proposed new
tribunal for its decision. The Noble Lord was much
more competent to pronouoce an opinion on that
point than any Committee would be, and, as the respon-
sible adviser of the Crown, he would see that not a
farthing was unnecessarily expended. There might be
some advantage in acceding to the proposal of the Hon.
Member for Middlesex. The duties of the office of the
Woods and Forests had become so enormous that it was
out of the question to expect that the Noble Lord would
be able to give sufficient time to the many subjects which
demanded his attention, and it was undoubtedly desirable
that some commission should be constituted which should
have the superintendence, not only of the Houses of
Parliament, but of every other great building under-
taken by the State. They were not, however, prepared
to say to what parties they would delegate this autho-
rity, and as the House was determined to hare as efficient
a control as possible over the expenditure, the best way
would now be to grant the Committee moved for by the
Hon. Baronet, but at the same time to take care that its
attention should be confined exclusively to the future
outlay on the new buildingi.—(l.leur, hour.) An inquiry
thus limited might lead to some practical recommenda-
tion; but, without such a limitation, the appointment
would be mischievous, and would only tend to still
further expense.—(Hear.)
Sir G. STRICKLAND agreed with the Noble Lord
that such a Committee, unless the bounds of the inves-
tigation were marked out, would be worse than useless.
Ho did not see why an inqairy into the state of the New
Houses of Parliament should be mixed up with an in-
quiry into the condition of Westminster-bridge. The
Committee might just as properly tv.ke evidence as to
the conservation of the Thames, or the repairs required
at Blackfriurs-bridge, the stone of which was said to be
crumbling away, and endangering the whole structure.
The House might rest assured that if they empowered
the Committee to interfere with Westminster-bridge,
they would be called upon to pay a million, which was
about the cost of Waterloo. bridge, for rebuilding.
Sir 11. WILLOUGHBY complained that ii,ooo/. be-
yond what had been voted had already been expended
on the New Houses. _

Mr. HUME also believed that the appointment of
such a Committee as that moved for would be productive
of much inconvenience and additional expense. The
great fault committed by the House in this matter had
been in failing to throw the responsibility upon some
one individual, to whom the entire control of the expen-
diture should have been entrusted. They found th:st
first one person and then another had interfered; at one
time the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and again a Com-
mittee of Taste, and the result was, an enormous excess
over the original estimates. In the present state of the
finances of the country, it was the duty of the 11? use to
take every means within their power of avoiding ex-
pense, and he therefore hoped that the amendment of
his Hon. Friend would be carried.
Mr. BERNAL said it would be most ridiculous to
attempt to arrive at any conclusion in matters of taste in
that House, and ho had never known any good to arise
from the discussion of such matters in a Committee.
The Committee moved for was to consider the present
state of the New Palace at Westminster, and also into the
present state of Westminster-bridge. Here were objects
placed in juxta-position which had nothing to do with each
other. It the object of the Hon. Baronet was to hare
Westminster-bridge taken down and a new one built, in
common fairness he ought to say so. At a time when
we were seeking to reduce our expenditure, it was not
fair to keep such a project in the background. They
had now arrived at such a position with regard to the
Houses of Parliament that they could not retreat. He
was ignorant of what the Hon. Baronet meant to do in
the Committee.; but he thought that some department of
the Government might superintend the expenditure
which he thought no Committee of the House was com-
petent to do. The Chancellor of the Exchequer should
come forward and say—'• We will undertake the in-
quiry, not by ourselves, but we will employ and pay
competent persons to do so;" and such a proposal should
have his hearty concurrence.
Mr. R. YORKE said the finishing stroke had been
put to the proposed Committee by what had fallen from
the Hon. Gentleman who had just spoken. He should
feel gratified if the Nob!e Lord would agree to the pro •
posal of the Hon. Member for Middlesex; but if the
motion for the Committee was persisted in he should
make the motion of which he had given notice, namely,
to leave out the names of Lord Morpeth, Sir R. Peel,
the Earl of Lincoln, Lord E. Bruce, Mr. Cardwell, and
Mr Tufnell, and to insert instead the names of Mr.
Bankes, Lord H. Vane, Mr. Henley, Sir 11. Willoughby,
Mr. Langston, and Mr. Mitchell.
Sir. R. INGLIS, in reply, said the object of his
motion was the same as that of a furmer motion upon
this subject. The reason of the juxta-position of West-
minster-bridge and the new palace at Westminster in
the motion was their local juxta-position, which was
no Wilt of his. The t,eruis were the very agrao as

the motion two years ago, for this amongst other
reasons—that Westminster-bridge formed one of the
chief approaches to the new pares. The Honourablp
Member fur Marylebone thought it a grievance that the
Committee should have been arranged between the Hon.
Member who moved it and her Majesty's Government;
but no such Committee was ever appointed without a
full understanding and communication with the Govern-
ment. He would not be provoked into a discussion as to
;he great constitutional principle involved in the nomen-
clature of the edifice; but he could refer to high autho-
rities in justification of the phrase he had applied to it.
His late Majesty, in a speech from the throne, on the
24th of February, 1834, after the destruction of the two
Houses of Parliament by fire, used the phrase, " the
ancient palace of Westminster," and the same phrase
was employed in an announcement which appeared in the
Gazette a few days before Parliament met. Even the
Hon. Member for Montrose had recently moved for a
return respecting the " Palace at Westminster." He felt
that, having consulted her Majesty's Government, and
obtained the consent of the Hoe. Members whom he had
named, he should not do justice to either if he abandoned
the motion.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, as
reference had been made to the control which he, as
Chancellor of the Exchequer, exercised over the expen-
diture for this object, he wished the House to understand
the extent of his responsibility, which eas to determine
the sum of money to be proposed to be voted each year.
How the expenditure was to be carried on was not for
him to determine, nor had he time to devote to the pur-
pose. The subject of the palace had been mixed up with
that of Westminster-bridge, and there had been wale
misapprehension upon this point. Some time ago it had
been found necessary to block up two arches of the
bridge, and to reduce the weight of the superstructure in
order to render it safe for carriages. The danger had
been obviated, and he believed that the bridge was in a
state of perfect safety, At the same time, it was only
temporarily so, and it was impossible that the bridge
could remain as it was, with two of the arches
blocked up, offering an obstruction to the navigation
of the river. Although he had some misgivings as
to the appointment of a Commission, yet, upon the
whole, he did think it might be the beat course with
reference to the present motion. The duty of care-
fully supervising the sums to be expended upon the new
Houses of Parliament was one which on no account
ought to be neglected, but he presumed it must be per-
fectly evident to the House that that was an undertaking
for which the responsible advisers of the Crown could
not—owing to their other engagements—command suffi-
cient time; probably, therefore, the result of appointing
the proposed Committee would in the end be the issuing
of a Commission by the Crown to see that the design
was carried out, and that the sums granted for that pur-
pose were not misapplied; and further, to take care that
there should be no deviation from the design without the
consent of the Government. He did not say that such
a Commission should have power to recommend any in-
creased expenditure, that must necessarily be left in the
hands of the Treasury. The Commission should be
purely a controling body. These were the views which
ho entertained on the subject, and if they met with the
general concurrence of the House, he should take the
liberty of suggesting that the beat course would be that
both the motion and the amendment be withdrawn; and
he thought that if a Commission were issued by the
Crown, appointing a very few persons for the purpose in
view, the best results would be produced.
Sir R. H. INGLIS would have no objection to with-
draw his motion if the Noble Lord at the head of the
Board of Works, whose especial duty it would be to ad-
vise the Crown on this point, undertook that such a
Commission should issue.

Lord MORYETII said that, under the circumstances,
he should consider it his duty to give such advice to the
Crown, recommending especially that the number of
Commissioners be very small indeed.

Mr. OSBORNE observed that now he need not press
his amendment.

Motion and aniendment, by leave, withdrawn.
REPEAL OF THE UNION.

The next notice was one given by Mr. J. O'Connell,
respecting a repeal of the union with Ireland, and when
the Speaker, according to the usual practice, called upon
that Hon. Member to move it, he did not appear.
FEES IN CHANCERY.
Mr. ROMILLY moved to discharge the order of the
Bth day of this instant February, referring to the Com-
mittee on fees (courts of law and equity) all petitions
which have been presented to this House praying for in-
quiry into the fees imposed upon the suitors in the High
Court of Chancery in England, in pursuance of the
powers contained i❑ the Act 5 and 13 Vic. c. 103. The
simple ground on which he brought forward this motion
was, that the Committee had been appointed fora psi ti-
cular purpose, and he believed that the proposed inquiry
was not essential to the real and useful purpose for
which the Committee had been granted.
Mr. AGLIONBY, as the Member who moved that
these petitions should be referred to the Committee, said
that he was no party to any understanding, and he had
invariably advocated that the whole question should be
referred to the Committee, to be inquired into.
Sir G. GREY said that the Committee had been
granted upon the express condition that the subject re•
tarred to by the Honourable and Learned Member for
Cockermouth, should not be included in the inquiry ;
and he, therefore, was of opinion that the order ought
to be discharged.
After a few words from Mr. HUME,
Mr. EWART expressed his opinion that the Com-
mittee itself was a competent tribunal to judge of the
extent of its powers as to the subjects of inquiry into
which it might enter.

Mr. STUART understood that considerable public
benefit was likely to arise from the Committee, and was
of opinion that it would be imprudent to mix up the
questions of compensation and fees.
Mr. BAINES believed that the public would not be
satisfied until the subject of the compensation which had
been awarded had been inquired into.
The motion was agreed to.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of,
and the House adjourned at a Quarter to Ten o'clock.