The Sun.
London, England, 1851-02-06 00:00:00

ADDRESSES TO THE CROWN.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL rose to move the resolution
of which he had given notice, viz.: —" That this House
will not proceed upon any ,motion for an address to the
Crown, to which opposition is offered, but in a Com-
mittee of the whole House, except with respect to
matters which have been previously submitted to a
Select Committee." It was his intention to have pro-
posed this resolution to the House towards the close of
last session; but, upon consideration, he thought it better
to postpone it to the present time, when it was
likely there would be a full attendance of
Members.—(Hear, hear.) The House was aware that
questions of great public importance were frequently
brought forward in the shape of a motion for an address
to the Crown, and it occasionally happened that those
motions were carried by a thin House in the first in-
stance. It was clear, therefore, that an address
did not always convey the feeling of the majority;
but, in the case of Bills, such an anomaly rarely
occurred, for even if a Bill were carried by a
thin House on a second reading, the decision could be
reversed whenever it came under consideration in sub-
sequent stages.—(Hear, hear.) The inconvenience re-
sulting from the carrying of an address by the minority
was obvious, because it went forth to the Crown as the
address of the whole House, representing the opinions
and feelings of the majority, and it placed the advisers
of the Crown—indeed the Crown itself—in a situation
of great difficulty, if it were inexpedient on public
grounds to comply with its prayer.—(Bear, hear.) Such
an inconvenience, however, would seldom or never oc-
cur if the House adopted this resolution. Of course
the Crown had the power of assenting or dissenting
from the prayer of au address; but it was always the
wisest policy to avoid putting the Crown into a seeming
position of antagonism to the Ilouge.—(llear, hear.)
What he wished to propose was already in spirit in
operation; for all measures relating to the voting of the
public money came forward in the first instance en a
motion for a Committee of the whole House.—(Bear,
hear.) He need hardly specify instances were inconve-
niences had arisen; but he might as well advert to two
cases which would clearly and conclusively illustrate his
argument. Some two years ago, the House would
probably remember, that a few Members suc
ceeded in carrying an Address, praying the Crown
seriously to restrict, if not entirely to abolish, the trans.
portation of prisoners to the colonies. The address was
of course complied with, but only at a public sacrifice.—
(Hear, hear.) Another instance would be fresh in the
recollection of the /louse, because it only occurred last
year. It related to the Post-office. (Hear,
hear.) Immediately after that address was
carried, an Honourable Member asked him if
the Government were disposed to comply with
its prayer. He then stated that he did not believe that
the address represented the opinion of the majority of
the House; but, at the same time, it had gone forth to
the Crown as the formal address of the House, and he
did not feel called upon to advise her Majesty to reject
it.—(Hear, hear.) Now, had this resolution been in
force, much of the agitation which that address gave
rise to would have been avoided, and that argument he
thought, if he had no other to support:it, ought to induce
the House to adopt this motion.
Mr. BERRIES said he had listened with great atten-
tion to the statement of the Noble Lord. He confessed
he had come down to the House with a strong feeling,
that this attempted abolition of the rights and privileges
of Members was unnecessary and inexpedient, and he
was bound to say that the statement of the Noble
Lord had in no respect removed that impression.
He was strongly of opinion that the measure was neither
necessary or expedient. It had been too much the prac-
tice of late to curtail the privileges of individual Mem-
, bers.—(Hear, hear.) In some instances, perhaps,
that practice might have promoted the public
service, and facilitated the dispatch of business,
while in others his opinion was that it
bad been unnecessary, and would enable the
Ministers to do that which might receive no effectual op-
position. The tendency had always been in that direc-
tion.—(Hear.) When he had first the honour of a seat
in the House, every Member had an undoubted privilege
of rising in his place, and making a motion forthwith,
without giving any notice beforehand.—(Hear,
bear.) That practice had been found inexpedient,
though be believed the House had still the power of
enabling a Member to avail himself of the privilege, )et
he was ready to admit that by universal consent the
eight had been removed, and now it was expected
that every Member should give a notice of any motion
he intended to make. Now, in all those cases in
which a restriction had been imposed with manifest
propriety or something like an excuse for the progress
of public business, he had never opposed theiproposi-
tion, nor seen any reason to shrink from supporting it;
but in ,the present case the proposition arose out of a
particular matter, as all persons were aware it arose out
of an occurrence last year which was considered
extremely distasteful and inconvenient. The Noble
Lord's position was, that with regard to any motion for
an address to the Crown, to which opposition was
offered, it should be made a condition to come before a
Committee of the whole House, except to matters which
which bad previously been considered by a Select Com-
mittee. Now, he would ask the Noble Lord, in the
first instance, in what way that resolution could
be complied with. With regard to the motion
for an address in answer to the royal speech no one
could say that opposition would not be offered, and there
was no previous committee of the whole house to which
it had been referred. If the noble lord meant that
every address, before itcovimams
itptreeesenttoed,ribunselheouad 1
nwdr
sao
wuwbel
drawn
a select
referred to
ddsareases
auppp,lyheto apprehendedf
rt h a tanthe
a
to the Queen's Speech, but thatwasonootn had
exprebsseeedn,intthhaet
words of the resolution. If this motion
an address should not be presented until the preparation
of that address had been referred to a Select Committee,
then he could have understood it; but that was not the
case, and the Noble Lord did not mean to say
that it was either implied or expressed. if
the Noble Lord was disposed to make au amend-
ment to his own motion, or allow him (Mr. Herne+) to
do so, that would be another question, but as the motion
stood at present, it would be an obstacle to public busi-
ness. Supposing, for instance, that some foolish insane
person should make an atteck upon her Ma'
.iesty, the House ought to be in a position
immediately to make a communication of t 1 e
expression of their feelings at the ocourrenct
but the resolutiou of the Noble Lord did not meet thet
difficulty. And it should be recollected that before the I
address could be referred to a Committee of the whole
House it would have to be m...,de an order of the day. This
of itself furnished a good ground of opposition to the
motion of the Noble Lord. The Noble Lord
had adverted to the occurrence of last year when
an address was moved to the Crown on
the question of postal regulations on Sunday.

Now, if he recollected aright, ample notice was given to
the House on the subject. and her Majesty's
Government had sufficient time to be prepared to
meet the motion with their opposition. Even
after the Address had been passed there was
an opportunity—even supposing it had been carried by
surprise—for the Government to obtain rejection.
There was another exprestion of the Noble Lord's to
which he would call their attention, as it con-
cerned the principle and constitution of the House.
The Noble Lord, in proposing this resolution, supposed
the case of an address being presented to the Crown,
which the Crown could not acknowledge or receive, and
the address was sent back to be reconsidered by the
House, and th• House still persisted in it, then the
Crown would be in a position of difficulty. He (Mr.
Herries) did not concur in that view of the subject, for
the case put by the Noble Lord amounted to nothing
moae than a difference of opinion between the Crown
and the House of Commons. Her Majesty's Govern-
ment had, without adopting the resolution of the Noble
Lord, plenty of time to obtain the real
sense of the House of Commons upon the
Address, and to command a majority. Look-
ing at this subject generally he felt the greatest
objection to agree to the proposition of the Noble Lord,
as no sufficient grounds had been stated to satisfy the
House that it ought to be agreed to. Honourable
Members Lad been trammelled in the exerc►se
of their functions as Members of that House, and they
bed already too quietly submitted to their privileges
being curtailed. Unless the resolution of the Noble
Lord was for a different reason to that which appeared
upon the paper, he (Mr. 'ferries) could not agree to it.
Mr. MILNER GIBSON wished to ask the Noble
Lord at the head of her Msjesty's Government how
this proposition would affect the ordinary motions
which Members were in the habit of making
for the return of papers from public offices
If the returns moved for were opposed, according to the
terms of the Noble Lord's motion, any motion
for the retur❑ of papers from public offices
were opposed the motion must go throug4 t vvo
stages before the returns could be obtained.
He (Mr. M. Gibson) begged to suggest that it would be
reasonable to except returns from public offices from
the operation of the Noble Lord's resolution. He wished
the Noble Lord would explain the effect of his resolu-
tion upon a motion being made for returns from public
offices.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said—lf there were any
opposition to any returns which might be moved for
from any public office, his resolution certainly would
have the effect of causing the motion to pass through
two stages, but he did not apprehend that that
would, as such motions were not generally
opposed. The Right Hon. Gentleman who opposed
this resolution, said that it affected the liberty of the
individual members of this house, he (Lord John
Russell) could not agree with the remark of
the right hon. gentleman, because it was not her
Majesty's Minister who decided upon the address to
the throne, but a majority of the House. The Right
Hon. Gentleman had said the resolution would be found
inconvenient in cases where any opposition was made in
any matter relating to any Member of the Royal Family,
but such matters were not usually opposed. It had
been said that the Members of the House had
suffered disadvantage from the interference with their
privileges, but if any had suffered disadvantage it
was the public. It had been said that this resolution
would affect the privilege of Members making motions
without notice. It had been deemed most conve-
nient for Honourable Members that the ccourse of
giving notice of the motions should be acted upon, but
those cases in which Members had made motions with-
out giving notice of them would not be affeeted by his
preposition.
Mr. GOULBURN said, in considering this resolu-
tion proposed by the Noble Lord, the House ought
not oulv to consider the immediate effect that it would
have upon the privileges of Hon. Members, but at the
ultimate and general effect it would have upon
them. The resolution appeared to him (Mr. Goulburn)
to lay down a new principle to that which the House
had been in the habit of acting. The resolution of the
Noble Lord produced this difficulty, that when a
motion was opposed a different course must be pursued
to when it was agreed. A single " No" on the part
of an Hon. Member would have that effeet.—(Hear.)
The great part of the business of the House was done
through the medium of address. Papers were moved
for which, being in the Secretary of State's-office, it was
impossible to get ut except by the medium of moving an
address to her Majesty. Let them consider how
this would operate. If a party in opposition required
informatio❑ on certain matters not pending at the time,
but executed and done with, the records of which were
lying in the Secretary of State's office, it would be pos-
sible, by a simple dissent from a Minister, to put an effec-
tual stop to any steps taken to obtain this information.
Lord BERNARD suggested that an occasion might
occur when an address of want of confidence in the
Miuisters would be moved, and by the adoption of this
measure a second chance would be afforded to Minis-
ters of getting out of a similar crisis as they were in in
the time of Lord Melbourne's Government.—(Hear.)

Sir G. GREY said that the effect of the resolution
would be merely to prevent any address which was re-
pugnant to the sense of the House.
Sir ROBERT INGLIS understood, from the last
observation of his Right Honourable Friend the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, that it was in-
tended by the Government to depart from the usual
course of proceeding in voting addresses to the Crown.
He had always understood that the practice of both
Houses of Parliament was the samo, but if this resolu-
tion was adopted discrepancy would be caused which
Might occasion great inconvenience.
Lord JOHN RUSSEEL said that, perhaps, it would
be better to take tiwe fur a little more consideration,
and he would therefore move the adjouaument of the
debate till Tuesday next.
Sir R. INGLIS thought that it would be impossible
to come to a deeision on Tuesday.
Mr. DISRAELI would suggest that if it was neces-
sary to take any time for consideration the debate had
better be adjourned for a fort❑ight—(hear, hear)—or
be decided that night.
Lord J. RUSSELL said he should take no further
steps in this matter until Tuesday next.

Tuesday next was then fixed-upon for the reaucnp•
tion of the debate; the other orders of the day were dis-
posed of, and the House adjourned.

CONVOCATION OF THE CLERGY.

Yesterday having been appointed for the meeting of
the two Houses of Convocation, a large number of the
elected members attended at the Jerusalem Chamber
adjacent to Westminster Abbey, although no writ had
been issued for " the dispatch of general business."
Shortly after twelve o'clock his Grace the Archbishop
of Canterbury arrived. His Grace was accompanied by
the Worshipful Sir John Dodson, Knight, the Queen's
Advocate, and Vicar-General of the province of Canter-
bury; Francis Hart Dyke, Esq., her Majesty's Proctor
and Registrar-General of the province of Canterbury;
and Felix Knivett, Esq., his Grace's secretary. His
Grace was attired in his state and archiepiscopal robes.
The members of the Upper House present were the
Bishop of Exeter, the Bishop of Oxford, the Bishop of
Salisbury, the Bishop of Chichester, and the Bishop of
Bath and Wells.
The Lower House assembled at the same time. There
were present the Venerable Thomas Thorpe,D.D., Arch-
deacon of Bristol, and Rector of Kemerton, Gloucester-
shire; the Venerable Archdeacon Harrison (Canter-
bury); the Very Rev. William Rowe Lyal], D.D., Dean
of Canterbury and Prolocutor of Canterbury; the Rev.
William Hodge Mill, D.D., Regius Professor of Hebrew
in the University of Canterbury, and Canon of Ely; the
Rev. Gabriel Edwards Gillett, M.A., rector of Waltham,
Leicestershire, and Rural Dean, See.
Some delay was occasioned by the circumstance that
the Bishops of Oxford and Salisbury proceeded to the
Chamber without their episcopal robe 3. Messengers
were sent to the House of Lords, and very shortly after-
wards the robes were brought, and the Right Rev. Pre-
lates made their appearance in duo form before his Grace
the Archbishop.
The Lord Archbishop having taken his soat, the usual
preliminaries were gone through, when
Tho Bishop of CUICIIESTER rose, and said he had to
present a petition from the clergy and laity of the pro-
vince of Canterbury. It had been entrusted to the
bishop in whose diocese they were at present assem-
bled (London), but in consequence of that Right Re-
verend Prelate's inability to attend, the duty of present-
ing the petition devolved upon him. His Lordship then
handed to his Grace a petition, of which the following
is a copy :

" TO THE MOST REVEREND THE ♦RCHBISHOP AND THE
RIGHT REVEREND TUE BISHOPS OF THE PROVINCE OF

CANTERBURY, IN SYNOD ASSEMBLED.
" The humble Petition of the undersigned Clergy and
Laity of the said Province,

" Showeth—Tbat for upwards of 130 years past this
Church of England, the oversight of which is, by Divine
Providence and permission, committed to your Lord-
ships, has suffered grievous injuries and inconveniences
through the continued suppression of her synodal
action, whereby she has been prevented from exercising
her proper authority for the maintenance of her doctrine
in purity and integrity, for the regulation and whole-
some exercise of her discipline, and for the development
of her internal resources.]
" That the result has been the weakening of the
bonds of love and unity among Churchmen, the growth
of unsound doctrine, great diversity of rites and cere-
monies, and a lamentable deficiency of provision for
ministering the Word and Sacraments, and other means
of grace to the people of this land, whereby it has come
to pass that error and superstition, heresy and schism,
ungodliness and immorality, have greatly increased, to
the injury of Christ's people, and to the reproach of the
Church.

" That in consequence of the recent aggressive mea-
sures of the Pope, the attention of the Queen and people
of England has been forcibly directed to the religious
position of the country; and that if, at this time, the real
cause of the decay of true religion, as well as of the
growth of Popery, and other grievous errors, and of in-
fidelity itself, were represented to her Majesty by the
Bishops of the Church, to whom it especially belongs to
advise the kings of the earth in regard to spiritual
matters, there is great reason to hope that by their re-
presentations and entreaties her Majesty might be
moved to restore to the Church the freedom of her sy-
nodal action, as in ancient times.

Upon which considerations, the undersigned petition-
ers, having approached her Majesty in a humble address
for the revival of the active functions of Convocation,
humbly implore you, Most Reverend and Right
Reverend Fathers in God, that you will again
urge the prayer urged by the two Houses of
Convocation of the province of Canterbury in
the year 1847, for license to deliberate, and,
with the Royal assent, to do all such things as concern
the settled continuance of the doct7roinuemaanyd.bdeisecnipel,biineed (t)fc.
tthhee
LowerChure ahoofgEsengolf candon,
ytooct:tieoenn,d that, in concert with