The Sun.
London, England, 1834-05-23 00:00:00

man who aspires to any public situation in the service
of his country must appreciate at its due weight--that
is, he must utterly ontrrot —r,ll such attacks upon an
apparent want of consistency in public men as are
brought forward merely as clap-traps, and for the pur-
pose of producing a momentary impression against the
sentiments now expressed in a present speech, but not
as sound and valid arguments against the principles which
it involves. So much on the subject of the sentiment
with which the hon. gentleman commenced his speech,
a sentiment which, as applied to. public men or mini-
sters, I cannot understand. But I can very well un-
derstand that there is a class of persons who may have
scats in this house, and whose speeches, with all the
pains they can take, and notwithstanding their great
merits, may not be so widely promulgated by means
of the public press as the speakers wish. ( Hear, and
laughter.) I can very well understand that there may
be persons who, having risen from being prime orators
in a parish vestry, do nevertheless find their inferiority
in the House of Commons. ( Renewed laughter.) I
can very well understand that there may be reasons
why such individuals should repine that their speeches
are not reported at length in the newspapers, and
complain that their fame is not extensive enough. ( A
laugh.) I can very well understand the grounds on
which those gentlemen may think the press wrong in
taking a different view of their weight and merits from
that which they themselves entertain. I can also
understand why, though the speeches of those indi-
viduals would be considered entitled to great respect
and ample dimensions in a parish meeting, or a coun-
try paper ; I say I can understand, or at least ima-
gine, why they form but a small part of the printed
records of the debates in this house, and are rather
under-rated by newspapers, whose object it is to publish
matters generally interesting to the country at large.
( Hear, hear.) Such being the case, I can very well
understand why the plenipotentiary of the kingdom of
Marylebone (Laughter) calls upon his brother mi-
nister (the Secretary of State for the Foreign De-
partment) to support a motion, the object of which
is to circulate widely his important ideas, and give
currency throughout all the courts of Europe to
his powerful and extensive views. (Great laughter.)
' I can very well understand that the dignity of the
kingdom of Marylebone should be properly sustained
by its plenipotentiary and representative, that he ought
not to yield to the Foreign Secretary ; and I can as
readily believe, if the Autocrat of all the Russias should
happen to hear that the hon. gentleman had denounced
him in the House of Commons,—l can as easily be-
lieve, that it such an event, the Czar would think his
empire gone for ever. ( Hear, hear, laughter, and a
cry of " Order," " Question," from Sir S Whalley.)
The hon. gentleman calls me to order, and cries
" Question." I am not aware in what respect I am
out of order, and I always supposed that it was not
over civil to call " Question" when a gentleman was
speaking, especially if he happened to be speaking di-
rectly to the question. If the hon. gentleman means
to say that I am not speaking to the point in debate, I
maintain and am ready to prove the contrary. I am
answering the hon. gentleman's speech, and my ob-
ject is to show that those mighty interests in the coun-
try which, according to the hon. member, exercise so
great an influence on the empire at large and the
whole of Europe do now receive sufficient scope and
currency ; that the feelings and sentiments of what is
most important in the country, in the constituent and
representative body, are carried all over Europe, and
have due weight with every power. But it appears
that some of those gentlemen to whom I have before
alluded, whose sentiments do not carry equal weight
with them, complain that their speeches are not dif-
fused so widely as they might desire. ( Cheers and
laughter.) I am instancing the case which the hon.
gentleman himself puts. The hon. gentleman
says—" I, the representative of Marylebone, call upon
you, the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, to join me in
this motion for the publication of an authentic report
of the debates of the house." ( Sir S. Whalley--
No,—not so.") Not so ? Then I do not wonder
that the public press should be occasionally mistaken.
( A laugh.) I think the authorized reporter of the
hon. gentleman will have a hard task. (Laughter.)
Certainly, if I were his authorized reporter I should
have put down with the utmost confidence that the
hon. gentleman called on my noble friend the Foreign
Secretary to support the motion. ( Renewed laughter. )
And why should I have done so ? Because the hon.
gentleman stated, on the noble lord's own admission,
everything that falls from hon. members in this house
is circulated all over Europe, and must necessarily
influence foreign powers, and therefore I, the repre-
sentative of the kingdom of Marylebone, call upon you,
'my noble colleague. and Secretary for Foreign Affairs,
to join me in this motion for the communication of our
joint sentiments in an authentic and influential shape
to all the courts of Europe. ( Hear, and laughter.)
Such were not exactly the hon. gentleman's words,
Jut such was the spirit of his statement. ( Sir S.
Whalley—" You have a very bad case.") " A very
bad case," does the hon. gentleman say ? That re-
mains to be proved. The question is, as to the ad-
vantage or disadvantage of the present method of pub-
lishing the debates as opposed to the system which the
hon. gentleman proposes. How does the present plan
work ? I have very often occasion to trouble the
house ; it is true I have little time to read the reports
that appear in the newspapers of my speeches, or those
of other members,--perhaps the hon. gentleman has
more time, and devotes it to the perusal of his own
speeches. (Laughter.) ( Sir S. Whalley—" I do
not read yours.") The honourable gentleman says
he does not waste his time in reading my
speeches, whatever time he may devote to his
own. ( A laugh.) Well, I do not complain of my
speeches being misreported, and neither will the hon.
gentleman, for he does not read them. (Laughter.)
But the hon. gentleman complains that there is not
sufficient space devoted to the speeches of the repre-
sentative of Marylebone in the newspapers, the writers
of which have an awkward trick of being guided by
their own judgments, or, better still, their own inte-
rests ( Laughter) in the admission of matter which they
give or withhold, in proportion to their belief of its
importance or the reverse. Is it surprising that the
newspapers should contain what the readers of news-
papers desire to read rather than what nobody could
be found to read? ( Hear and laughter.) Is not this
reasonable ? The hon. gentleman says, " No, give
us not a selection of readable and interesting matter,
but the whole debate ; every word that is spoken in
Parliament, everything without misrepresentation or
omission, no matter how full of repetitions or how
devoid of interest." Now suppose the hon. gentleman
gets his authorized reporter to take down every word
spoken within those walls, and the whole is published,
what wil be the consequence ? I will tell the hon.
,
gentleman, the people won't read a word of it. (Great
laughter.) What is the state of things at present ?
Are not the proceedings of the house published and
circulated ? They are, and that by authority. Every
petition is stated, every stage of every bill, and all the
proceedings on every bill, public or private, are re-
corded. This by authority, and further, so far as the
newspapers think the matter important or interesting
to their readers, the details of proceedings go forth to
the public. ( Hear.) But the full debates, all long and
dresome speeches, repetitions and inanities, do not go
forth, because all of a considerable number of indivi-
duals connected with the papers, but not acting in con-
cert, agree that in those debates there is a great deal
of f needless and worthless matter, which nobody cares
tt
hoourenb,
gioogentleman unlesswd o
su ei l it be
sense,
eue: thetorre
proposesbapeda
t.r
tt
better
(cr
nHutol
heat
rar,
tno,
tleavehaend good speakers,
isot laughter.)
gaasnhnedtyne which
to
ohe
Trtt
hhht
eoee
what they will publish upon interests of the writers of the de-
cideapeoeruspidreersasttioeuef
what the community—their customers— will or will not
buy. ( Hear, hear.) The hon. gentlemanouse proposes
that that every thing done or spoken in the h
circulated by authority in future. ( Sir S. Whalley__
" I proposed no change in what is now done ; I merly
said that it would be a shame and a national reproach
if the only accurate report of our proceedings were
allowed to drop for want of support.") Very well,
the hon. gentleman wants no change ; he merely says
that it would be a national loss if the only accurate re-
port of the proceedings of the house were allowed to
fall for want of support. I presume the hon. gentle-
man refers to the Mirror of Parliament? ( Sir S.
Whalley—" Yes.") If so, all I can say is, that as far
as I have had an opportunity of judging, that publica-
tion has been conducted with great enterprise, skill,
and ability. The right hon. gentleman proceeded to say
that the question whether that publication must drop or
not was one for the public to decide. If the hon.
gentleman was so anxious that full and complete re-
ports of his speeches—such, no doubt, as appeared in
the Mirror of Parliament—should be given to his con-
stituents, why, the hon. gentleman might distribute a
number of Mirrors of Parliament amongst his consti-
tuents for that purpose. His constituents, of course,
would be obliged to him for them ; those who chose
would read them, and those who did not would not ; but it
was rather too much to call on the public to pay for
such a thing. He (Mr. Stanley) believed that ell
matters of importance—in all debates of interest—the

public press at the present moment gave of what pas,: d
in that house as long, as full, and as correct ACCOUI tS
as the public wan.ee—is the public wished for ; raid
that the publication of the debates, as now given in de-
tail in the daily papers, viewed as the means of con-
veying information to the public of what was done
there, and as thereby the means of affording the check
of public opinion on the proceedings of that house, and
of the members of it,—he repeated that the publica-
tion of all important debates was, regarded in such a
light, given in the daily press to as large an extent as
the public themselves thought desirable. ( Hear, hear.)
Besides, it should be considered that !even were any
plan of this kind desirable, it must be attended with
considerable expense to the public. During the last
fortnight they had imposed "more than 1,000,0001. on
the consolidated fund. They had during the last
fortnight placed upon it votes for 120,0001., for
140,000/., and for 520,0001. They had, in fact, placed
to the charge of the consolidated fund during that pe-
riod a sum amounting to no less than 1,000,000/. ster-
ling. Now what was in reality the proposition of the
hon. and learned member ? It amounted in truth to
this—that as nobody read their speeches when given
at full length, as the public did not think it worth
their while to read the debates in such an enlarged
form ; and as the members were anxious that their
constituents should know all that they did and said
in that house, therefore that the consolidated fund
should have a charge imposed upon it for the purpose,
the public paying for the publication of speeches,
which they, which nobody would think it worth
their while to read. (Hear, hear.) He would again
repeat that he would, if there was no other objection
to it, object to this proposition on the ground of the
total absence of any necessity for it. The debates
were given,-as he had already said, in the public
papers at present as fully upon all important questions
as the public required. In all important discussions
the public were made acquainted as fully as was neces-
sary with what every man said in that house. But
above all, he objected to the proposition, because it
would go to establish a monopoly in the publication of
the debates in that house, in opposition to the news-
papers, which published sufficiently full reports at the
present moment. He objected to the establishment
of a monopoly for an authenticated authorised publi-
cation of the speeches delivered
.in that house. The
present system of reporting the proceedings of parlia-
ment in the daily papers afforded to the public as full
an account
eemp complete
a of
checkthem
uponas tthheey teeedd,i
eagnad of affordedthat houses
pwranoc
as the public could desire to possess ; and he therefore
objected to the establishment of an authorised mono-
poly in the publication of speeches, which no one
would ever read when they were published. (Hear,
hear.)
Colonel D A VIE S said that they should adhere to
the real question before them, and not wander into
matters that had nothing to do with it. The right
hon. gentleman, in attacking the hon. member for
Marylebone, had followed the example which he had
condemned on the part of that hon. member, and had
indulged in sarcasm instead of employing argument.
The question was not whether the speeches of Mini-
sters, or of any other members of that house, were or
were not fully reported, but the simple question was
whether or not there should be an authorized and au-
thenticated publication of the speeches delivered in
that house. ( Hear.) All that was urged by his hon.
friend on the subject was, that it should be an instruc-
tion to the committee to take that question into consi-
deration. The committee might report, after doing
so, that there was no necessity for any authorised re-
port of the proceedings of that house, or they might
report the contrary way. At all events, the question
was one well worthy of being sent to them for consi-
deration. He (Colonel Davies) was of opinion that
an authenticated publication of the proceedings of that
house would be productive of great benefit. The
right hon. gentleman objected to the proposition on
the ground of expense. Now he (Colonel Davies)
would venture to say, that if they referred the matter
to a select committee, it could be shown that they
might have an authorised account of what passed in
that house without the publication costing the public a
single shilling of expense. (Hear, hear.) There was
no one more ready than lie was to admit the extraor-
dinary accuracy with which the public papers gave the
debates in that house ( Hear) ; but it was perfectly
impossible that the daily papers could give all that oc-
curred there at full length. It was quite impossible
that all their proceedings could be given in full detail
in the daily papers. The question then was, whether
they should not entertain the proposition for an au-
thenticated publication of their debates, and send it to
a conimittee• up stairs for consideration. He for one
supported the proposition, as he was of opinion that it
would be productive of great public benefit.
Mr. C. FERG USSON said that he would not
support the motion, if the object of it was to establish
a monopoly in opposition to the daily public press.
( Hear.) He, for one, would say that the manner in
which the public press was conducted with regard to
the debates in that house was such as hon. members
had no right to complain of. (Hear, hear.) If hon.
gentlemen would only refer to the reports of their
speeches in the public papers, they would generally
find that when they were not reported at great length
it did not arise from the fault of the reporters, but that
it was the fault of hon. members themselves, who had
not on such occasions spoken sufficiently well to entitle
them to a detailed report. (A laugh, and "Hear,hear.")
He (Mr. C. Fergusson) believed that, generally
speaking, he was as shortly reported as any hon. mem-
ber in that house, but of that he did not complain.
He thought that if hon. members would look to those
speeches that were shortly reported, they would find
that in most instances it arose from such speeches
being more deficient in point than those that had been
given at greater length. ( Hear, hear.) The reporters
were generally exceedingly happy in giving the points
of a speech, and if an hon. member should be happy
in making points in his speech, he would have no
reason to complain when he found those points pre-
served while the unnecessary verbiage was rejected.
( A laugh, and " Hear, hear.") He would support
the motion, but he would repeat that he would not do
so if he at all thought that it would go to establish a
monopoly against the public press. He supported it
because he thought that it would be of great public
advantage to establish an authentic record of all the
proceedings in that house. It was not the interest of
the public press to give debates upon many questions,
however important those questions might be to
certain parts of the empire, at any length, and,
indeed, it was often impossible for the daily
papers, even upon questions of the highest public
interest, to give the reports, owing to the time
at which the debates occurred, at any length, if they
would give them at all. Every one who attended that
house was aware that important debates often oc-
curred at such late hours, that it was impossible for
the reporters to do any justice to them. He had him-
self often heard good speeches delivered at 2 and 3
o'clock in the morning, when it was obvious to every
one that it was impossible that they could be reported
at such a late hour at any length in the daily papers.
It might be observed upon important debates, that
while the speeches delivered early in the evening were
given at great length, those delivered at a later hour,
though perhaps more eloquent and important, were
necessarily abridged in the daily papers. He himself
could state several instances when subjects of the
greatest importance were brought on at a late hour in
the house, yid where, without any blame attaching to
those who conducted the daily press, such discussions
were greatly abridged, if not altogether omitted. It
was obviously impossible that anything like justice
could be done to discussions that occurred after mid-
night, as important debates very frequently did in that
house. There were also instances where the daily
papers, it being their interest he supposed to do so,
abridged to a very great extent discussions upon im-
portant subjects in that house. He could instance the
discussions that occurred in committee upon the East
India charter. He had known a debate of five or six
hours in that committee despatched in seven or eight
throughout
houg inudteedse,etltaheadt
that
lines. He had known discussions upon the Scotch
Reform Bill given with equal brevity, and he under-
atwastheya
could
deral
not complaint
whatplaint
their representatives said in the House of Commons.
(A laugh, and " Hear, hear.") It was a general
subject
complaint throughout Scotland that •
s rela-
ting to that country were not reported sufficiently
fully. It appeared to him, indeed, that the discussions
relating to Scotland might
certainly be given at
greater length than they
press, the more particularly
as Irish subjects occupied
such a space in their columns, and the speeches of the
representatives from that country were given such
enormous length, while those ho n. at
members who had
no right at all to compl • am on the subject actually
complained that their speeches were not reported.
( Hear, and a laugh.) He thought that more thaii
justice was done to the speeches of those hon. mem-
bers (A laugh) while there were no reports at all of
several most important discussions relating to Scot-
land. It therefore appeared to him a great object to
have a full and authenticated report published of the

proceedings that took place in that house—any per-
sons wli;s;. opinions were of consequence—any per-
sons like ministers of the crown, filling high official
situations, and who might have their opinions here-
after quoted in debates it was of great importance
to all such persons that their opinions should be quoted
correctly. No members were so interested in that
object as the hon. members who sat upon the trea-
sury benches. Though there were many things that
passed in that house that the daily newspapers might
not think it worth their while to report, yet there was
no doubt that they were of importance to some portion
or other of the people of England, and it would there-
fore be most desirable to have a full and authentic re-
port of what passed there published. His right hon.
friend said that the public would not read such report
when published. Those constituents who were in-
terested in the subject would read the report of the
debate upon it; and it was but right that each part of
the empire should know the part which their represen-
tatives took in qiiestions, to them, of great importance.
He would therefore support the motion, on
the ground that the people should have a full
and authentic report of what occurred in that
house. But it was said by his right hon. friend
that such an object would not be attained without
great expense to the public. If it could not be other-
wise done, he for one would abandon it till some fu-
ture opportunity. But the hon. member for Wor-
cester had stated that it could be effected without one
shilling of expense to the public. The question then
was, whether they should not have a full and authen-
tic report of what passed in that house. That was the
plestion, and not whether they should establish the
.51irror of Parliament. He thought that such an
authentic record of their proceedings might be esta-
blished without any injury to the daily press. He
would therefore give his support to the motion.
Mr. W. WYNN said that he hardly understood
what was exactlythe proposition before the house. It
was, as he understood it, for an authorized and au-
thentic report of their debates, and then it was stated
that they should be published without any restriction
save the discretion of the authorized reporters. There
was no medium—no alternative to choose between
those two propositions. Either it must, after all, be
left to the judgment and discretion of the reporter to
determine what shall be given and what shall be
omitted, or they must have every word that was
uttered given. Now in attempting to report fully
all that occurred, it would be impossible for the re-
porters to avoid numerous mistakes, owing to the
noise and confusion which so often prevailed in the
house. Was it intended to report at full length every
word that was uttered, whether the question regarded
.a railroad, which, though totally devoid of national
or general, might be possessed of great local, im-
portance, or whether the question was one that
affected and interested equally all the parts of
the empire ? Let them but for a moment re-
flect upon the immense length to which the
publication of their debates would reach, if every
word that was uttered in that house upon every pos-
sible subject should be reported. They usually ex-
tended their debates in the evening sittings to 8 hours.
They had to add to that what took place at the morn-
ing sittings. They generally sat for that time 4or .5
days in the week. They must therefore see what an
enormous extent of space the debates of 30 or 40 hours'
duration would, if fully reported, occupy in any publi-
cation, and what an immense time it would take to
read through such a mass of matter. ( Hear.) It
was perfectly impossible that there could be any de-
mand for such a publication. It could only be pub-
' lished at the public expense, and it would be impos-
sible to find persons to read it. It was impossible, as
he had said already, seeing the noise which so often
took place in the house, that a reporter could take
down accurately everything that occurred. It would
therefore be necessary, if there was an authentic re-
port of their speeches, for which members should con-
sider themselves responsible, that they should them-
selves correct their speeches, to see whether there was
anything in them which therhad not uttered. Now,
it would be utterly impossible for ministers, and for
'members connected with the law, frequently to ad-
dress the house, if they should be obliged to correct
the report of every speech that they delivered. That
they would be obliged to do so was manifest, if they
established an authorized publication of the proceed-
ings, as all members would be responsible for their
speeches inserted in such publication. Where was
the utility of referring such a proposition to a commit-
tee ? What advantage would a committee have in
discussing it, that was not attainable by the house at
large ? The question was, whether the proposition
would be fraught with any public benefit, and whether
it would not be attended with great public
expense.. He had not heard any plat: proposed
by which it could he carried into effect without expense
to the public. If it could be done so, it was fit that
the house should be made acquainted with such plan ;
and then, if the house thought that the plan was a good
one, and that it would be advantageous to adopt it, it
might refer it for consideration to a select committee.
Ho believed that the best security for the proper and
impartial publication of the debates of that house in
the public press was to be found in the competition of
that press. ( Hear, hear.) At present, he was of opi-
nion that upon all important subjects the debates were
as correctly and as fully given as the public desired.
He recollected, however, that some years ago a dif-
ferent system was adopted, and that a complete mis-
representation of the' speeches of particular members
appeared in the daily papers. He remembered that,
in one instance, the late Mr. Tierney having given
some offence to the press, his speeches were for a long
period altogether omitted. With respect to the de-
bates in the committee on the East India Charter, to
which allusion had been made, it did strike him that
though the matters which were discussed in that com-
mittee were of great importance, yet that the speeches
made upon them had been so often repeated, that if
they had been published in the daily papers no one
would be found to read a word of them. (Hear, hear.)
It was either intended by the present proposition that
a full report of all that occurred in the house should
be given, or that selections should be made of the
most material and interesting points in each discussion.
That selection should be made upon the responsibility
of an editor appointed for the purpose by the house ;
but if that editor should happen to curtail the speech
of an lion. member shorter than he thought it should
be given, that member might say to him, " I have as
good a right to have my sentiments reported fully,
and they are of as great importance to my constituents
as those, for instance, of the how. member for Dublin,
or of any other hon. member ; and why should not I
be reported as fully ?" A great portion of time would
therefore, if the system of selection should be adopted,
be taken up in answering and satisfying the com-
plaints
vv ouuldgrcee
tmh,eerye
soht
eads
and
dllyd
deserver es
eprio ret
de d. , or
He awt
of members who would complain that they
rtatainlelyngotphp,osase
the motion.

Mr. BUCKINGHAM said that he did not think
that any one had ever advocated the proposition that
everything that was uttered in that house should be
reported ; but at the same time it was plain that an
authentic record of their proceedings was much wanted..
Every one who attended to their debates, and who
read the reports of them in the public papers, must
have been struck with the inequality of their execution.
Now he would just inform the house how that differ-
ence in the merits of the reports occurred. There
were, some reporters so extremely skilful that they
could give most correctly every part of a discussion ;
after them would come a second class of reporters who
were not so skilful, and in their portion of the report-
ing the discussion, a commensurate degree of inaccu-
racy would be observable; and lastly they would be
followed by third rate reporters, mere students in the
who, with the best intentions to report ac-
would report everything wrong. Such was
causecpthuroerafetesslYin'
might be observed in the different stages of the report
of a discussion in that house, as published in the daily
papers. Nothing, besides, was more common than to
find it stated in the reports in the papers that the re-
porters regretted that they could not hear some obser-
vations; for instance, of the noble Chancellor of the
Exchequer( A laugh), owing to the low tone in which
they were delivered, or to the noise which prevailed in
the house. . There was no intention not to give the
observations, whatever they were, on such occasions,
for regret was uniformly expressed at their not having
heard them. He himself recollected an instance where
the hon. baronet the member for Hampshire delivered
an important speech on the China trade, which was
dismissed in five lines in the daily papers, though the
hon. baronet afterwards published it in a pamphlet.
It was, therefore, desirable that they should have an
authentic publication for preserving such important
discussions, and he thought that such a publication
might be established without a single shilling of
expense to the public. He (Mr. Buckingham) had had
some experience in those matters (A laugh), and he
would undertake to show to the committee that it was
quite possible to establish such.a publication without
its costing the country or the house a single shilling.
He would undertake to show bow that could be done,

Ana how they could have all their discussions reported b
the best,possible manner. His plan was this—let four or
siit of the most skilful reporters that London could
supply be employed for the purpose of taking down all
the proceedings of the house, and let their remunera-
tion be regulated according to the scale which the
newspapers paid for the slips sent round to them.
( So we understood the hon. member to finish the sen-
tence, but it was a task of no small difficulty to catch
the conclusion of his sentences.) Something of the
kind it was most desirable to effect. Of course, in
giving the speeches in the various debates all the sur-
plusage would be removed out of them. He pledged
himself, if the matter should be referred to a com-
mittee, to lay before them aplan for carrying the object
into effect.
Mr. MORETON said that the question was whe-
ther they should refer a question relating to one of the
grand privileges of that house to a committee ap-
pointed for quite a different object. If it was necessary
to refer it to a committee at all, they should appoint a
committee for the special purpose of considering it
alone. He did not think that the principle of report-
ing their proceedings as it at present existed called for
any alteration. The present proposition involved a
great privilege of the house, not only as regarded
reporting, but as regarded the seeing of strangers in
the house.
Mr. SHAW said that, as an Irish member, he did
not rise to complain that the debates ur on Irish sub-
jects were not given at quite sufficient length in the
daily papers for all public and general purposes. The
question was not whether the system of reporting
their proceedings in the daily press could not be
better, for he believed that for all public purposes a
sufficient quantity of their debates was given in the
papers (hear) ; but the question was, whether it
would not be advisable to establish a publication in the
nature of a standard, for the purpose of affording an
authentic record of their votes and proceedings. fie
thought that the establishment of such a publication
would be productive of benefit, and he would therefore
support the motion.
Mr. WILK S said that all the world was interested
in having a complete, accurate, and detailed account
of the proceedings that took place in that house, and
it was of the utmost consequence to the country that
such an authentic record should be established. If
this subject should be referred to the committee, they
would be enabled to collect information as to what had
been done by legislatures in other countries on the
subject. They would find that in the American legis-
lature a regular system of ample and accurate re-
ports of their proceedings had been carried into effect.
In France, too, it was perfectly well known that cer-
tain funds were appropriated by the legislature for the
purpose ; that a reporting newspaper, called the Ste-
nographe, was established for that purpose ; and that
it was supported at the expense of the government and
of the chambers. In that paper the speeches of the
members were given in full, as they had been spoken.
The committee might in this way obtain information
as to what had been done in other countries, so as to
establish what he conceived would be a great improve-
ment here. He would therefore vote for referring the
subject to a committee.
COlonel EVANS said that he could not support the
proposition of the hon. and learned member. He
thought that it was impossible in the first place, and
objectionable in the next. He quite concurred with
those who thought that the best security for the proper
publication of the proceedings of that house in the
daily papers was to be fonnd in their competition.
( Hear, hear.) If the proposition was for providing
better seats for the reporters in the house, and if, on
the part of the reporters, it was shown that they desired
and wanted better accommodation, he would be most
anxious to support any proposition for providing them
with it. ( Hear.) But he altogether agreed in the
objections which the right hon. gentleman, the Secre-
tary for the Colonies, had offered to this motion. He
agreed with him, that the public papers were the best
channels for communicating to the public the proceed-
ings of that house ; and he agreed with him that no
minister, past or present, could feel any peculiar inte-
rest in such a question. He did not, however, consider
it quite consistent with the right hon. gentleman's
dignity as a minister to indulge in some of the obser-
vations which he had indulged in on this occasion.
. _

Mr. SH EIL said he wished the right hon, baronet
the member for Tamworth had been in the house, for,
upon the occasion of a complaint made by the hon.
and gallant member for Devonport ( Admiral Codring-
ton) last session, he occupied the house two hours and
a half, and very properly occupied it, with his vindi-
cation, and he brought down the Mirror of Parlia-
ment (Hear, hear), and upon the Mirror of _Parlia-
ment the right hon. baronet founded his defence.
(Hear, and No.) He appealed to the recollection of
every member in the house at the time. He (Mr.
Sheil) had a distinct, it might not be an accurate, re-
collection, that it was to the Mirror of Parliament
he appealed. He did not say that the right hon. ba-
ronet did not refer to the Morning Chronicle for con-
firmation. Then here was an ex-minister, on a ques-.
tion of importance to himself and also to the country,
hiving recourse to this publication as a standard work
and a parliamentary record of his speech. His (Mr.
Sheil's) reason for rising was to call the attention of
the house to this fact, as showing the importance of
having some work which should be an authentic record
of what was said in that house, and no persons were
more interested in this than the King's ministers, in
order that the country might have an accurate record
of their speeches.
Mr. STANLEY said that, according to his recol-
lection, it was the gallant admiral who brought down
the Mirror of Parliament, and the right hon. baronet
stated that he had never read his speech from the time
it was delivered, but that his recollection was so and
so ; and he brought down, next day, the Times, the
Herald, and Hansard, which he quoted against the
Mirror of Parliament. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. SHEIL—At all events, the Mirror of Par-
liament was quoted. (Laughter, and cries of "Oh !"
and " Spoke.") He spoke in explanation, if the
house thought this matter of fact deserved to be ex-
plained. It was plain that there was a reference to
the Mirror of Parliament. With all respect to the
right hon. secretary, he (Mr. Sheil) did assert that it
was to the Mirror of Parliament the right hon.
baronet appealed. The case then stood thus :—He
( Mr. Sheil) brought the authority of the right hon.
baronet—an authority to which the right hon. gentle-
man (Mr. Stanley) would be willing to pay deference.
(Cries of " Spoke.") All he wanted to say was that
the Mirror of Parliament was quoted either by one
side or the other. If it was appealed to by the hon.
and gallant admiral the member for Devonport, was
not his case made out? (Laughter.)
An HON. MEMBER under the gallery could be heard
only so far as stating that he cordially supported the
motion.

Mr. CA YL E y said that the vote he should give
in favour of the motion was not for the purpose of
having daily reports, but to have an historieal record.
He wanted to refer to them as to Johnson's Dictionary
or an Encyclopedia.
Sir E. CODRINGTON said that it was he who
referred to the Mirror of Parliament as the gocument
upon which he relied, as he was abroad at the time
the speech of the right hon. baronet was delivered.
He admitted that the Times and Morning Chronicle
were produced against him, not, however, as contra-
dicting, but as not confirming, the remarks, the Mira
ror of Parliament professing to give the whole of the
speech.
Mr. TOOK E, in reply, observed that he did not
wish to have verbatim reports, but an authentic record.
The expense would be very trifling, and he hoped the
house would not refuse to avail itself of such a mode
of ascertaining and recording its sentiments.
The house then divided :
Ayes 99
Noes ll7
Majority against the motion lB
BARON DE BODE'S CLAIM. -

Mr. LLOYD rose to move an instruction to the
committee on the Baron de Bode's claim, with a view
of enabling certain claimants under the conventions
entered into between Great Britain and France to be
heard by counsel before the committee in opposition to
that claim. The hon. member entered into the details
of these claims (an account of property seized and se-
questrated in France), which have been repeatedly
stated. The claimants whose case he brought before
the house rested upon such real and demonstrable
grounds of justice, that he could not conceive there
would be any opposition to his motion. The claims of
these parties had been recognised by the Lords of the
Treasury in 1830 and 1832. The claim of the Baron
de Bode could not be supported ; he had not a shadow
of a claim ; but if he was allowed an ex parte hearing
before a committee, and was to have an ex parte re-
port from the committee, the funds would perhaps be
appropriated, and the just claims of the present peti-
tioners might be put off to an indefinite period. He
merely asked, on the part of these persons, whose in-
terest must be admitted, that they might be heard by
counsel before that committee. The instruction he
moved was, that the committee should take the matter